9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding, the matter requires re-consideration by the Commission. In respect of interest, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has pointed out that in paragraph-15 of the order, there is a discussion as well as finding as to why the Commission has declined to waive the interest. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to point out any infirmity regarding the said conclusion so as to persuade this Court to interfere with the same. Therefore, the clause in respect of interest cannot be set aside, and the same needs to be confirmed. Appeal partly allowed. - 2310-2311 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 7-11-2008 - S. Nagamuthu, J. [Order (Common)]. - The petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 2310/2008 is a Company registered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all work out the interest liability and intimate the same to the applicants within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, the applicants shall pay the same within 30 days from the date of receipt of intimation from the Revenue and report compliance to the Commission and the Revenue. (iii) The Bench imposes a penalty of Rs. 2,20,000/- on the applicant and Rs. 1,00,000/- on the co-applicant, immunity in excess of the said amount, is granted both to the applicant and the co-applicant respectively. (iv) The applicant and the co-applicant are granted immunity from prosecution under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and other central acts." The petitioner in both the Writ Petitions challenges the clause relating to impositio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He would further submit that even assuming that the petitioners' company is a Sick Industrial Unit, nevertheless Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisional) Act, 1985 would not be applicable in respect of penalty and interest under the Central Excise Act. He further adds that the petitioners' company did not make full and true disclosure and, therefore, they are not entitled for waiver of both penalty and interest. 4. I have considered the rival submissions. 5. On going through the entire order of the Commission, I am at loss to find any reason stated in the order as to why the request of the petitioners' company for waiver of the penalty was rejected. Though it is now argued by the learned counsel for the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t extent, the matter is remitted back to the first respondent for re-consideration and for fresh orders. (ii) the first respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioners afresh, strictly in accordance with law and pass orders after affording sufficient opportunity to either parties, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iii) In respect of the interest ordered to be paid by the petitioners, I do not find any reason to interfere with that part of the order and, therefore, the Writ Petitions are dismissed in respect of the same and thus the impugned order relating to payment of interest is confirmed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
