9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithout payment of applicable duty of excise during the period April 2001 to August 2001. Following the visit of the officers of the department to the premises of the respondent, a notice was issued to them proposing to demand duty due on the goods cleared and to impose penalty for the contravention of various statutory provisions involved in the clearances without payment of duty. Concluding the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 11AC. A penalty of ₹ 5000/- was also imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the original authority. 2. In this appeal of the Revenue, ld.SDR submits that waiver of equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC could have been ordered only in cases where the assessee voluntarily made good the non-pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erated by the Commissioner (Appeals), wherein both the authorities had accepted the claim of lack of awareness of the changes in the duty structure of textile on the part of the respondent was genuine. Ld.counsel also submits that the actual duty liability of the respondent was much lower than what they had discharged. The original authority accepted that the duty demand was on the total proceeds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allow relief admissible to the respondent in terms of Section 4 (4) (d) (ii) of the Act. However, the assessee has not filed any appeal against the impugned order. In the circumstances, I do not find that the impugned order calls for any interference. Accordingly, the impugned order is sustained and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
