2013 (7) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt of this very Bench in the case of Tejpal Paper Mills Limited vs. CCE, Ahmedabad [2010 (259) ELT 79 (Tri. Ahmd.)], because in the present case the goods were removed on payment of duty through RG23A Part-II. 2. Heard both sides at length. 3. The issue involved in this appeal is that appellant defaulted in payment of duty for the month of February 2008 for more than 30 days from the due date. Appellant also defaulted payment of Central Excise duty of Rs.35,63,359/- during the period March 2008 to December 2008. As per the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, appellant was required to pay duty consignmentwise by debit in the account current during the default period from April 2008 to December 2008 but the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amended provisions of Rule 8(3A) that it was the responsibility of the appellant to pay duty consignment wise from account current. In the event of any failure to follow this procedure, the goods cleared will be deemed to have been cleared without payment of duty and the consequence and penalties as provided in the Central Excise Rules shall follow. So far as reliance placed on the judgment of CESTAT in the case of Tejpal Paper Mills Limited vs. CCE Ahmedabad (supra) is concerned, it is relevant to reproduce below Para 6 of the judgment of PEE DEE Polymenrs vs. CCE Ahmedabad [2012 (278) ELT 647 (Tri. Ahmd.)]:-    "6. The decisions cited by learned Consultant, to submit that the penalty under Rule 27 only is imposable and not und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of provisions of Rule 8(3A) of Rules and the decisions are as under:        (i) Siddheswari Industries vs. C.C.E., Ahmedabad - 2010 (259) E.L.T. 144 (Tri.-Ahmd.)        (ii) Parekh Bright Bars (P) Ltd. vs. C.C.E., Belapur - 2010 (249) E.L.T. 298 (Tri.-Mum.)        (iii) Krishna Chemicals vs. C.C.E. Ahmedabad - 2009 (244) E.L.T. 580 (Tri.-Ahmd.)        (iv) Sam Turbo Industries Ltd. vs. CCE., Salem - 2006 (200) E.L.T. 87 (Tri.-Chennai)        (v) Sai Packaging Industries vs. C.C.E., Chennai - 2010 (253) E.L.T. 107 (Tri.-Chennai)        (vi) A.R. Metallurgica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X