2017 (2) TMI 1146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts are in appeal against the impugned imposing the penalty of Rs. 20 lakh under Rule, 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 38 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant defaulted in making the payment of their duty liability for the month of June, 2003 and October, 2003 by 5th day of the next month of ending of the month, the appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty for June 2003 along with interest, therefore, as per the provision of Section 11A (2) (B), the penalty on the appellant cannot be imposed without alleging fraud, collusion, wilful statements, suppression of fact or intent to evade payment of duty with malafide intention. Therefore, the penalty on the appellant is not imposable. He also submits that for the default of October, 2003, the Ld. Comm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... judication order. In this case the appellant is defaulted in the making the payment of duty in time two times i.e. June 2003 and October, 2003. For the default of June 2003, the appellant paid duty along with interest but for October, 2003, the appellant paid the duty on pointing out by the Department. But no penalty has been imposed on the appellant for the default for the period October, 2003. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X