2015 (12) TMI 1636

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Appellant. Shri Ramakant Kothari, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent. ORDER The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order dated 31-3-2009, wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty of Rs. 13,89,000/- imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 in the adjudication order. The grievance of the appellant in this appeal is that for the month of S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 10,00,000/- towards the admitted duty liabilities. He further submits that the Department retained the excisable goods for which the respondent was not in the position to sell the same and realize the money for payment of duty. He also submits that the ingredients mentioned in Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for imposition of penalty have no application in the facts of the case. 3.&ems .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X