TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that:- Rule 96ZQ as also Rule 96ZQ(5)(ii) were the subject matter of writs pending before various High Courts challenging the vires of the same. Reference can be made to the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Union of India v. Krishna Processors [2009 (5) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the matters were remanded to various High Courts for deciding the question of vires of the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reduced the penalty imposed upon the respondents from Rs. 99,46,000/- to Rs. 5000/-, the present appeal stands filed by the respondents. 2. After hearing both sides, we find that the appellants were required to pay duty under sub-rule (1) of Rule 96ZQ of Central Excise Rules, 1944 by 5th of each calendar month during the month of April, 1999 to March, 2000 and for the period April, 2000 onwards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant in terms of provisions of Rule 96ZQ(5) should be equivalent to the duty late deposited by them or the imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000/- would meet the ends of justice. Revenue s contention is that penalty equivalent to 100% of duty deposited late should be imposed upon the respondents inasmuch as the said Rule provides for maximum penalty. 4. At this stage, we find that the Rule 96ZQ as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cisions stands brought to our notice, inasmuch as the provisions of Rule 96ZQ(5) which are the subject matter of present dispute, stands held as ultra virus by the Hon ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, we find no merit in the Revenue s appeal praying for enhancing the penalty equivalent to duty amount. 6. At this stage, we may deal with learned DR s contention that in the case of Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
