2023 (5) TMI 135 - AT - Central Excise

Levy of Equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Extended period of Limitation - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of M/S QUIPPO ENERGY PRIVATE LTD, SHRI MONTU PATWA VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, AHMEDABAD [2015 (10) TMI 1726 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] where it was held that the activities undertaken by the Appellant would amount to manufacture and Power Pack also known as Containerized Gensets would be classifiable under sub-heading No. 8502.2090 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the demand of duty alongwith interest for the normal period is upheld.

It can be seen that it was categorically held that since there is no suppression of fact, demand of extended period is not sustainable. The penalty imposed in the impugned order was held to be not warranted accordingly, the same was set aside.

When the penalty imposed under Section 11AC was set aside, the revenue’s appeal cannot be sustained - the revenue’s appeal is dismissed.