Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 923 - CESTAT MUMBAIMaintainability of appeal - non-prosecution of the appeal - Reduction in the quantum of penalty - section 78(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- In view of Rule 20 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, this appeal is liable for dismissal on the ground of non-prosecution of the appeal in terms of Rule 20 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. Quantum of penalty - HELD THAT:- The issue is squarely covered against the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA VERSUS M/S RAJASTHAN SPINNING & WEAVING MILLS AND COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S. LANCO INDUSTRIES LTD. [2009 (5) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that We completely fail to see how payment of the differential duty, whether before or after the show cause notice is issued, can alter the liability for penalty, the conditions for which are clearly spelled out in Section 11AC of the Act - the appeal is liable to be dismissed on merits also. The appeal is dismissed both under Rule 20 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for non-prosecution and on merits too.
|