TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty by willfully suppressing the facts and the evasion was unearthed by the Revenue in surprise checks – Held that:- where the outer limit of penalty is fixed, which indicates the scope of discretion, Rules 57-I provides for imposition of a penalty equal to the credit so dissolved and therefore, as regards the imposition of penalty under Rule 57-I in a sum of Rs. 1,64,687/- could not have been redu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty equal to the amount evaded/disallowed and also when the 1st respondent evaded duty by willfully suppressing the facts and the evasion was unearthed by the Revenue in surprise checks? 2. We have heard Mr. Arun Kumar, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel for the Department. The first Respondent though served had not entered appearance through counsel. 3. The issue raised in the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndatory penalty equivalent to amount of duty which cannot be interfered with and the Apex Court has further held that there is no discretion vested with the authority. The order-in-original confirms. (i) the demand of Rs. 1,64,687/- under Rule 57-I of Central Excise Rules, 1944, the demand of Rs. 1,91,681/- against the clearances Modvat credit availed capital goods i.e. Mobile crane, to their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty equal to the credit so dissolved and therefore, as regards the imposition of penalty under Rule 57-I in a sum of Rs. 1,64,687/- could not have been reduced. Whereas, since the discretion is vested with the authority to reduce the penalty under Section 173Q, that is not interfered with. The civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Centra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
