2017 (11) TMI 1623

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri S. J. Vyas, Advocate For Respondent (s): Shri Sameer Chitkara, AR Mr. Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeals against the impugned order for waiver of demand of interest and considering the penalties imposed on them. 2. The brief facts are that, on 23.12.2011 a search was conducted in the factory premises of the main appellant wherein certain shortages of finished goods were found and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sion of this Tribunal in the case of Metal Link Alloys Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Daman 2013 (298) ELT 117 (Tri.  Ahmd.). 4. He further submitted that no option to pay 25% duty as penalty has been given by the adjudicating authority in the adjudication order, therefore, the appellant shall be given an option to pay 25% duty as penalty.  He further submitted that as the mai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... id duty.  Therefore, the demand of interest is not sustainable in light of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Metal Link Alloys Ltd.(supra).  Accordingly, the demand of interest is set-aside. 8. Further, I find that in the adjudication order, no option has been given to the appellant to pay 25% duty as penalty as per the provisions of Section 11 AC of the Act.  Therefore, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X