TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest, we find that the interest is payable as appellant has not discharged the duty liability within time. We uphold the order of the lower authorities to the extent the interest liability has been confirmed. As regards imposition of penalty, we find that the Adjudicating authority has imposed equal penalty under the provisions of Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We find that the violation of the law in this case by the appellant is only to the extent that he has not followed the directions of the Adjudicating authority to pay the duty in PLA consignment wise. This cannot be equated with the stringent provisions of Section 11AC for the purpose of imposing equal penalty under Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner has confirmed the demand and imposed penalty vide the impugned order. Aggrieved by such an order of the Asst. Commissioner, the appellants moved an appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) after considering oral and written submissions made by the appellant before him, upheld the order by coming to the following conclusion. "8. The facts of the case discussed above are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellants have misstated that the duty was being paid in PLA consignment wise though they have neither paid consignment wise nor was the payment made in PLA entirely. The sole contention of the appellants is that the unit is sick and a harsh order is going to make it further sick. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... staff which resulted in non-payment of duty within time. It is his submission that penalty and interest imposed should be set aside. Though they were unable to pay duty in time, they have discharged the duty consequently. 4. Ld. DR would urge that there is a violation of the conditions by the appellant hence penalty imposed is correct. It is his submissions that the findings of both the authorities are correct and does not require any interference. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both the sides and perused the records. The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant is liable to be saddled with penalty and interest in the absence of his not following the provisions of law. 6. It is undisputed that the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We find that the violation of the law in this case by the appellant is only to the extent that he has not followed the directions of the Adjudicating authority to pay the duty in PLA consignment wise. This cannot be equated with the stringent provisions of Section 11AC for the purpose of imposing equal penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that a token penalty of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) would suffice to meet the ends of justice. 10. Accordingly the appeal is disposed of as indicated hereinabove. (Pronounced in open Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
