TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 535/- has been imposed for delayed payment of duty of ₹ 22,18,262/- which was paid with interest by the appellant. He submits that in the absence of any confiscation of goods or any evidence to show that there was any intention to evade duty, penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules ('Rules' for short) is not justified. He also submits that there was only delay in payment of dut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le the same should be under Rule 27 of Rules only. On the other hand Ld. JCDR submits that it is not correct on the part of the appellants to claim that they had paid duty and interest voluntarily. She submits that duty and interest was paid after 414 days and that too after the same was pointed by the audit. Therefore, she justified the penalty imposed. 2. I have considered the submissions mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
