9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Industries Ltd. are only challenging penalty imposed on them by the Commissioner under Rule 96ZP (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture Hot Rolled products of Non-alloy steel which were chargeable to duty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, w.e.f. 1-9-97; that the Appellants opted for payment of duty o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Levy Scheme by debiting Cenvat credit and imposed an equal amount of penalty under Rule 96ZP(3). The learned Advocate, further, submitted that they were entitled to pay the duty on any final product out of the Cenvat credit; that the Rule does not talk about final product already manufactured or being manufactured; that further, the entire exercise is Revenue neutral inasmuch as they had during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty during the period December, 1999 to March, 2002 penalty is payable under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944; that under this Rule the penalty shall be equal to the amount of duty outstanding from the manufacturer at the end of each month. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The facts are no in dispute that the Appellants were discharging duty liability under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we accept the submissions of the learned Advocate that the exercise would only result in Revenue neutrality, if the party had paid duty towards compounded levy through PLA and the duty on the goods cleared by them debiting Cenvat credit account. The second issue remains regarding imposition of penalty under Rule 96ZP(3). Proviso to sub-rule (3) of Rule 96ZP provides that where a manufacturer fails ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
