2006 (8) TMI 196

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 8-10-2004. 2. The assessee was governed by 'Compounded Levy Scheme' under Section 3-A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with relevant rules i.e. Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short, "1944 Rules"). The excise duty was determined for the furnace in question. The assessee contended that the furnace was 'batch type' and not 'pusher t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5 to submit that since Rule 96ZP(3) of the 1994 Rules provides for penalty equal to the amount of duty, the assessee having delayed the payment of duty due without there being any stay, reduction of penalty to 50% was not called for. 5. On the other hand, the assessee has preferred C.E.A No. 64 of 2005 to contend that no penalty whatsoever should have been levied as the assessee had paid the amo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en due. In the circumstances of the case, it cannot be held that no penalty whatsoever was attracted in absence of mens rea. 9. Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal have concurrently exercised their discretion in imposing 50% penalty. Even if two views are possible, the view taken cannot be held to be perverse. Where discretion is exercised, interference is called for in appeal under Section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X