2011 (2) TMI 27

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5.2004.   2. None appears for the appellants. However, there is a letter dated 11.08.10 seeking decision on the appeal on merits and to consider applicability of decision of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Harish Silk Mills Vs. CCE, Surat 2010 (255) ELT 393, wherein it has been held that option to pay concessional penalty in terms of proviso to Section 11 AC should be allowe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... original authority.   4. The Ld. SDR submits tat the appellants have shown payment for the three fortnights using credit entries in PLA while no amount was actually paid to justify taking such credit in PLA. Therefore, he submits that it is a fit case for invoking the provisions of Section 11AC. He fairly concedes that the original authority and the Commissioner (A) have not given an option .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otice. Under these circumstances, the prayer of the appellants for giving option to pay concessional penalty of 25% of duty involved in terms of proviso to Section 11AC deserves to be accepted.   6. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of as follows:- (a) Penalty imposed under Section 11AC is upheld. (b) However, the appellant is given option to pay a sum of Rs. 69,126/- as penalty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X