TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1027X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of moulds which have to be amortized in the value of the parts does not stand disputed by the assessee and they have discharged their duty liability, on being pointed out by the Revenue – Thus, imposition of penalty upon the appellant is not called for as there was no malafide intention on the part of the assessee to amortize the lower cost of the moulds in the value of the vehicle parts - confirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scheme i.e. at nil rate of duty. The said moulds were supplied to present appellant who used the same in the manufacture of parts. Admittedly the value of moulds supplied by M/s. Maruti Udyog was amortized and included in the value of parts manufactured by the appellants. The value so amortized was without inclusion of basic customs duty as no duty was admittedly paid by M/s. Maruti Udyog at the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts, in terms of directions of the Revenue, paid the duty in or around January, 2003. Thereafter proceedings were initiated against them by way of issuance of Show cause notice proposing confirmation of deposited amount as also for imposition of penalties. The said Show cause notice culminated into passing of impugned order confirming the demand and imposing penalties up to the extent of 100%. Hen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned advocate submits that imposition of penalties to the extent of 100% on the appellant was not warranted and prays for setting aside the same. 6. Learned DR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the reasoning of the adjudicating authority and submits that though the appellant had paid the duty, the imposition of penalty under the provisions of Section 11 AC was appropriate and as such, pray ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d their duty liability, on being pointed out by the Revenue. In such a scenario, we are of the view that imposition of penalty upon the appellant is not called for inasmuch as there was no malafide intention on the part of the assessee to amortize the lower cost of the moulds in the value of the vehicle parts. As confirmation of demand of duty has not been disputed by the appellants, we uphold the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
