Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 863 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (11) TMI 863 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Eligibility of exemption under N/N. 5/98-CE, dt.3.6.1998 - Air Mingled Polyester Yarn - Air Mingled Polyester Yarn were exempted prior to 01.03.1999 by virtue of Notification No.5/98-CE, dt.3.6.1998. However, the said product became remove from the exemption list w.e.f. 1.3.1999 - whether benefit of exemption will be available for the clearance of the goods during the period January 1999 to March 1999? - the Appellant did not dispute about the duty, b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that imposing penalty equal to the duty confirmed would be too harsh. However, it cannot be denied that there was violation of the provisions of the Central Excise Act and the Rules made thereunder while clearing the goods availing the exemption Notification. Therefore, imposing of nominal penalty would meet the ends of justice. Keeping in view the circumstances, in my opinion, imposition of penalty of ₹ 5,000/- would suffice the purpose. Accordingly, the penalty is reduced from ₹ 44 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

istian, Advocate For Respondent: Shri T.K. Sikdar, A.R. ORDER This appeal is filed against OIA No.MS/73/SRT-II/2008, dt.20.06.2008, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C.Ex. & S.Tax, Surat-II. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Air Mingled Polyester Yarn, which were exempted prior to 01.03.1999 by virtue of Notification No.5/98-CE, dt.3.6.1998. However, the said product became remove from the exemption list w.e.f. 1.3.1999. The Appellants c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Rule 173Q of erstwhile Central Excise Rules 1944. Aggrieved by the said orders, the Appellants preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, reduced the duty further to ₹ 44,021/- and imposed equal amount of penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules 1944. Also, she directed recovery of interest under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944. Hence, the present appeal. 3. The learned Advocate Shri Willingdon Christian for the Appellant submits that the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on by the Appellant. It is his contention that no penalty is imposable in the facts of the present case. He has further submits that the Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 in its present form has been introduced w.e.f. 11.05.2001. Prior to the said date, for invoking said provision, element of suppression, mis-declaration etc was necessary. In the present case, in absence of any suppression, mis-declaration etc, interest under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 as was before 11.05.20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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