TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal whereby penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed. The appellants are not contesting the demand of duty. 3. In this case, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of MT flats. On 23-12-2001 they cleared MT flats under six invoices, but this clearance was not entered by the appellant in the daily stock register. On 24-2-2001 when the Excise Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-2-2001 also found to be rubbed. These circumstances show the mala fide intention on the part of the appellant. 6. In this case the contention of the appellant is that duty was paid prior to issuance of show cause notice. Therefore, the imposition of penalty is not sustainable. 7. Appellants relied on the decision of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. (supra). In this case, the assessee was manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
