TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 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 discretionar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntesting the penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority and upheld by the first appellant authority. 4. Learned Counsel submits that appellant is contesting only the penalties imposed. He would submit that the main appellant M/s. Srishti Software Applications (P) Ltd. was visited by the officers of DGCA and its was noticed that during the period August 2006 to October 2010, they had deve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the CCE, Bangalore vs. Genea Fine Punch Enclosures Ltd.; 2011 (267) E.L.T. 481 (Kar.) , has laid down that once any demand of duty has been discharged before the issuance of show cause notice and voluntarily pays the duty and interest payable thereon, question of imposing penalty under the provisions of section 11AC and Rule 26 does not arise. He would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of CCE, Coimbatore vs. Sri Ranga Balaji Cotton Mills; 2015 (315) E.L.T. 698 (Mad.). 7. The facts are not disputed in this case. 8. The main appellant has been developing software solutions and clearing them as packaged software on which during the relevant period, duty liability was not discharged though liable for duty. It is also undisputed that appellant has discharged, the dut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants on the grounds of appeal. I do note that the explanation put forth by appellants lacks cogent reasoning. 10. In my considered view, the judgment of apex court in the case of UOI vs. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills; 2009 (238) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) would apply in its full force in the case in hand. Accordingly, in view of the foregoing, I hold that the order imposed is correct a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
