9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ested the validity of the impugned order, only relating to the imposition of penalty amount and adjustment of abatement. 3. The learned SDR has very vehemently contended that the penalty should have been imposed equal to the amount of duty which was paid late by the respondents in view of the law laid down in the case of Pee Aar Steels (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut - 2004 (170) E.L.T. 406 (All.) = 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment by the respondents was financial crisis and the same has been accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals). The imposition of penalty under fourth proviso to Rule 96ZP(3) on defaulting assessee is mandatory but the quantum of penalty is to be determined by the competent authority. Court or Tribunal by taking into consideration the attending circumstances in each case. It cannot be made universal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, it may also be added that the respondents had filed claim of Rs. 1,25,000/- for remission of duty and that was decided on 3-6-2000, when their claim was allowed. The argument of the learned SDR that adjustment of this amount could not be given to the respondents towards outstanding duty cannot be accepted for the simple reason that when remission of duty has been allowed to them, that remis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
