Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 232 - CESTAT BANGALOREPenalty u/s 11AC and Rule 26 - SCN has alleged that the duty liability for the period in question was not discharged due to suppression of facts and mis-statement in the form of not informing the revenue authorities about the developmental activities undertaken by the appellant - Held that: - the judgment of apex court in the case of UOI vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills [2009 (5) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], would apply in the case, where it was held that Once the conditions specified u/s 11AC of the Central Excise Act are satisfied, penalty becomes mandatory and there is no scope of discretionary power. Payment of differential duty, whether before or after the show cause notice is issued, can not alter the liability for penalty - penalty upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|