Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Air Carrying Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I

2018 (2) TMI 901 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Clandestine removal - benefit of reduced penalty - Held that: - admittedly the appellant deposited the interest within a period of 30 days along with deposit of penalty of 25%, within the said period, in terms of the Tribunalís order - Deposit under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8377; 4 lakhs made by them in terms of the said order of the Tribunal - appeal allowed. - E/87505/13 - A/91821/2017 - Dated:- 15-12-2017 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member Shri Shailesh P Sheth, Advocate - for Appellant Shri M. Suresh, DC (AR) - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re initiated against the appellant on the allegation of clandestine removal, which stand accepted by them. The duties were deposited and the matter was taken up before Tribunal for the purpose of penalties. Tribunal vide its final Order No.A/309-310/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

est along with 25% penalty. It may be noted here that during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, the appellant had deposited an amount of ₹ 4 lakhs as a condition of hearing of their appeal. 3. As a consequence of the Tribunal s fin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

est but such deposit was under a wrong accounting head and as such cannot be considered a proper implementation of the Tribunal s order. They accordingly held that the appellant is liable to pay 100% of penalty. The said order of the original adjudic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

efund of ₹ 4 lakhs, which was pre-deposited during the pendency of the appeal and in terms of the said order passed by the Tribunal. Learned Advocate also submits that the Revenue has not disputed the deposit of interest and the only ground is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version