Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi IV Versus M/s. Auto Tech Engineers, M/s. Bhagwati Trading Company, M/s. Ayushi Steel Co. (P) Ltd. And M/s. Kanika Strips (P) Ltd.

2015 (10) TMI 2274 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Justification of appeals filed by the Revenue - Non imposition of penalty - Held that:- On perusal of the impugned order, penalty on all the respondents have already been imposed by the adjudicating authority and by filing these appeals against these respondents by the Revenue, no specific relief has been sought. I have also perused the order of the Committee of Commissioners advising to file appeal before this Tribunal and on perusal of the said Review order, I find that Committee of Commission .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s been sought in the appeals against the respondents during the course of arguments. - Decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal Nos. 2759,2760, 2761 & 2763 of 2009- (SM) - ORDER NO. FO/53163-53166 /2015-Ex (SM) - Dated:- 7-10-2015 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Shri B B Sharma, AR : For the Petitioner None for the Respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal : Revenue has filed these appeals against the respondents namely M/s. Auto Tech Engineers, M/s. Bhagwati Trading Company M/s. Ayushi Steel Co. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with proviso to Section 11 A (1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. iii) ₹ 13,10,000 (Rs.10,00,000/- plus ₹ 3,10,000/-) already deposited by M/s. Auto Tech Engineers is appropriated against the Cenvat Credit demand confirmed above. iv) M/s. Auto Tech Engineers shall pay balance amount of confirmed Cenvat Credit demand of ₹ 4,67,263 along with interest under the provisions of Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al Officer and intimated to the noticee within 15 days of the issue of this order. v) I impose a penalty of ₹ 17,77,263/- upon M/s. Auto Engineers under Rule 13(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. If the balance amount of confirmed Cenvat Credit demand along with interest is deposited by M/s. Auto Tech Engineers within 30 days of receipt this order then the p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d four hundred fifty five only) upon M/s. Kanika Strips (P Ltd. Faridabad (all registered dealers) under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. C) Proceedings initiated against Shri Rupesh Bansal, Director of M/s. Ayushi Steels Co. (P) Ltd. and Shri Rakesh Bansal, Director of M/s. Kanika Strips (P) Ltd. are dropped 2. Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order which is recorded hereinabove for non imposing penalty on the principle respondent. 3. Heard the learned AR. Recorded his contention. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

een recorded inadvertently. He further submitted that penalty on proprietor M/s. Bhagwati Trading Company is to be imposed. 5. On perusal of the impugned order, penalty on all the respondents have already been imposed by the adjudicating authority and by filing these appeals against these respondents by the Revenue, no specific relief has been sought. I have also perused the order of the Committee of Commissioners advising to file appeal before this Tribunal and on perusal of the said Review ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ainst the respondents nor any relief has been sought in the appeals against the respondents during the course of arguments. 6. At this stage, learned AR submitted that para 6 in the appeal memorandum be taken on record as is grounds of appeal and names of Directors of the respondent are mentioned in said para 2 of the prayer. Learned AR was fairly asked when there is no relief sought in the appeals filed against the respondent by the Revenue, whether he is willing to withdraw the appeals or orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version