TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of clearance and on the same date, the appellants have paid duty - demand of interest set aside. 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 - option given to the appellant to pay 25% duty as penalty with in 30 days of the receipt of the date of communication of this order and failing this opportunity to the appellant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ages of finished goods were found and there was some shortage of raw-material also found. The appellant on the same date paid the duty attributable to these shortages. Thereafter, show cause notices were issued to the appellant to demand duty on the short found finished goods as well as on the shortage of inputs and to demand interest and also to impose penalties on both the appellants. The m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irm has been penalized, in that circumstances, penalty on the co-appellant of the partnership firm is not sustainable. Therefore, he prayed that impugned order may be modified to the extent. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the appellant is required to pay interest for the intervening period. 6. Heard the par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... give an option to the appellant to pay 25% duty as penalty with in 30 days of the receipt of the date of communication of this order and failing this opportunity to the appellant to pay 100% duty as penalty. I also find that as the main firm has been penalized. In that circumstances, penalty on the partner under Rule 26 of CER, 2004 is not sustainable. Accordingly, penalty imposed on the co-app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
