2008 (8) TMI 741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... his is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The original authority had demanded an amount of Rs. 5, 94,566/- due on RCC Poles manufactured and cleared by the respondents M/s. M.S. Samuel Sons during the period 1998-99 to M/s. TNEB. The original authority had imposed equal amount of penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He als .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... C by the original authority is correct. As the respondents had failed to register themselves, when they had crossed the value of clearance of Rs. 50 lakhs, setting aside penalty by observing that there was no wilful suppression of facts was not in order. The respondents are not represented. 3. On a careful consideration of the facts of this case, we find that the finding of the lower appellate a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X