9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The stock taking was conducted on 24/11/2015 and 25/11/2015. The Appellant has paid the Excise Duty on 25/11/2015 in respect of the shortage found. Therefore, there is no provision to demand the interest from the Appellant Company for the already paid Excise Duty. Hence, the interest demanded under the impugned order is set aside. Penalty on appellant company - HELD THAT:- Since they could not avail the benefit of the 25% of the penalty earlier, now they are given the option to pay the penalty @ 25% of 3,46,438/-. They should pay the revised penalty amount by 31st July 2024. Penalty on the Director - HELD THAT:- The Department has not made out any specific case against the Director to implicate him for the shortages found. As can be seen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 11AC giving an option to pay 25% of the same within 30 days of the date of receipt of the Order. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- on the Director of the company. Being aggrieved, the Appellants filed their Appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) who has dismissed their Appeals. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Learned Counsel submits that since there was no allegation that the goods found to be shortage have been cleared at any particular day or in any month prior to the stock taking, the Department cannot demand any interest. He further submits that though they were inclined to close the issue by paying the penalty of 25% imposed on the Appellant Company, they could not do so since the Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant Company is concerned, since they could not avail the benefit of the 25% of the penalty earlier, now they are given the option to pay the penalty @ 25% of 3,46,438/-. They should pay the revised penalty amount by 31st July 2024. 8. The Department has not made out any specific case against the Director to implicate him for the shortages found. As can be seen from the recorded statement of Mr. Subrata Goswami, it is seen that he is taking care of day to day activities of the company. Therefore, I find no justification imposing penalty on the Director and the same stands set aside. 9. The OIO stands modified to the extent as discussed above. 10. The Appeals stand allowed partly in respect of the Appellant Company and fully allowed in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
