Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1496 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - whether the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) have rightly reduced the demand, confirmed on account of clandestine removal and also justified in reducing the penalty imposed on the respondent partner, Dinesh Kumar Johary? - Held that: - no case of deliberate default of the provisions of law is made out to the effect that the respondents were knowingly that the branded goods are liable to tax and clearing, the same without payment of duty, so as to evade payment of duty. Thus, no case of clearance with intent to evade duty is made out against the respondents. Further, under the facts and circumstances, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) have erred in reducing the demand of duty and in view of the categorical admission by both the partners, wherein the proximate quantity of clearance have also been stated. I hold that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) have erred in reducing the duty demand and accordingly, I restore the demand of duty to ₹ 3,11,100/-. No case of deliberate defiance of the provisions of the Act and the Rules and/or suppression of facts is made out against the respondent firm and the partner, I set aside the penalties imposed on them. Appeal dismissed - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|