TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and order, after hearing concerned parties, Appeal is allowed accordingly. - First Appeal No. 3678 of 2008, - - - Dated:- 20-10-2010 - Naresh H. Patil and K.K. Tated, JJ. Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate, for the Appellant. S/Shri D.S. Kudale, holding for Pratap Rodge, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : Naresh H. Patil, J. (Oral)]. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The Appeal is Admitted on following substantial question of law : Whether principle of doctrine of merger in the facts of the present case is applicable to deny right of appeal to revenue? 3. By Consent of the learned Counsel for the parties the Appeal is taken up for final hearing. 4. Respondent-assessee is engaged in manufacturing e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfiscation of seized goods valued at Rs. 1,03,026/- (Rupees One Lac Three Thousand Twenty Six) under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 . 7. The Appellant further contended that as per said order, the respondent-assessee was given an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) and confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,32,427/- (Rupees One Lac Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Seven) under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 and imposed an equal penalty of Rs. 1,32,42 7/- (Rupees One Lac Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Seven) under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with section 11(A)(C) of the Central Excise Act, along with interest under Section 11AB. 8. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2009 (233) E.L.T. 446 (Bom.)]. 13. The learned Counsel further submits that in case the Appeal filed before CESTAT is not entertained, then interest of Revenue would be prejudiced. In the light of the facts of the case and principle underlying doctrine of merger, dismissal of the Appeal of the Revenue is required to be quashed and set aside by this Court. 14. Mr. Kudale, learned counsel appearing for respondent-assessee submits that in the facts of the case CESTAT did not commit any illegality and therefore, substantial question of law does not arise in this Appeal. According to learned counsel Appeal deserves to be dismissed. 15. We have perused the relevant orders placed before us, and the Judgment cited supra. We have considered t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
