TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 898X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty of ₹ 50,000/- under Rule 173Q on M/s NHPL is not justified. The Learned Counsel submits that the appellant is entitled to get the benefits of cum-duty benefit - impugned order in so far as the demand of duty alongwith interest and imposition of penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- under Section 11AC on M/s NHPL is upheld. Penalty imposed under Rule 173Q on NHPL is set aside. The penalty imposed on the other appellants are set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. : E/43-46/2008 - Order No. A/11374-11377/2015 - Dated:- 16-9-2015 - Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) and Mr. P.M. Saleem, Member (Technical), JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri P P Jadeja, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri T K Sikdar, Authorised Repr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Central Excise Act 1944 and also a penalty of ₹ 50,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules 1944 on M/s NHPL. A penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- each was imposed on M/s WAE and Shri Jaswantbhai Jagjivands Bhadreshwara, proprietor of M/s SGE and also a penalty of ₹ 2,00,000/- was imposed on Shri K Bhargavbhai J Jain, Director of M/s NHPL under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rule 1944. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudicating order. 2. The Learned Counsel on behalf of the appellants submits that there is no dispute M/s WAE was in existence and therefore the said unit cannot be treated as dummy unit. He further submits that the appellant had already paid an amount of ₹ 6,23,000/- during investigation a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest and penalty under Section 11AC of the Act, during investigation, imposition of penalty on Shri Bhargavbhai H Jain is not warranted. It is seen that that Adjudicating authority already imposed penalty under Section 11AC of the Act and therefore, the penalty of ₹ 50,000/- under Rule 173Q on M/s NHPL is not justified. The Learned Counsel submits that the appellant is entitled to get the benefits of cum-duty benefit. 4. In view of the above discussions, we modify the impugned order in so far as the demand of duty alongwith interest and imposition of penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- under Section 11AC on M/s NHPL is upheld. Penalty imposed under Rule 173Q on NHPL is set aside. The penalty imposed on the other appellants are set asi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
