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 →

M/s. Surya Ceramics Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T., Rajkot And Vice-Versa

2015 (10) TMI 2448 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Penalty u/s 11AC - Undervaluation of goods - Held that:- As the penalty was imposed under Section 11AC of the Act, we do not find that there is any requirement of impose penalty under Rule 173Q of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules. So, the contentio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

11AC. - appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed to the extent the penalty imposed under Section 11AC is enhanced to equal amount of duty. The assessees are entitled to pay the penalty 25% of the duty alongwith entire amount of duty and interest with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Saleem, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri Hardik Modh, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Alok Srivastava, Authorised Representative ORDER Per : Mr. P.K. Das; These appeals are arising out of a common order and, therefore, all are taken up .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

alty on the ground of undervaluation of the goods. The matter went up to the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the allegation of undervaluation and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for quantification of demand alongwith interest and impo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly. M/s. Surya Cermaics filed appeal against the demand of duty and penalty. Revenue filed appeals against both the assessees for imposition of penalty of equal amount of duty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 3. The learned Advocat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uty alongwith interest. They are contesting only imposition of penalty in both the cases. 4. On the other hand, the learned Authorised Representative on behalf of Revenue submits that it is well settled that the adjudicating authority has no discreti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es, 1944 as it stood during the relevant period. 5. As the assessee is not contesting the demand of duty along with interest in the case of M/s. Surya Ceramics, there is no need to discuss the merits of the case. Regarding the appeals filed by the Re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le Supreme Court that there is no discretion for reduction of mandatory penalty. Hence, it is required to impose penalty of equal amount of duty, under Section 11AC of the Act. 6. As the penalty was imposed under Section 11AC of the Act, we do not fi .....

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