TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that: - Rule 96-ZO of the Rules provides for imposing of penalty equal to the outstanding amount of duty or ₹ 5,000/- whichever is greater. The aforesaid rule has been declared to be ultra vires insofar as it postulates to impose penalty equal to the amount outstanding vide Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills vs. Commissioner of Central Excise [2015 (11) TMI 1172 - SUPREME COURT] - In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. The assessee-appellant has preferred this appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated 12.12.2006 by which the penalty of ₹ 4,58,334/- imposed under Rule 96-ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 has been reduced to Rs.one lac. The facts reveal that the assessee-appellant defaulted by 15 days in depositing the amount of excise duty of ₹ 4,58,334/-. On account of the said d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of the fact that the upper limit of imposing penalty equal to the amount outstanding has been declared to be ultra vires, a penalty of minimum of ₹ 5000/- or some reasonable higher amount alone can be imposed. There is material or basis to justify the imposition of penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- upon the assessee-appellant. In such circumstances, reduction of penalty even to Rs.One l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
