TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inevitable particularly when there is suppression of fact and extended period was invoked under the SCN - penalty upheld. Penalty on Director u/s 112(a) of the CA 1962 - Held that: - the appellant have admittedly paid the duty along with interest and they have also issued invoice in respect of removal of imported goods - the personal penalty was not warranted on Shri N.K. Chaudhari, who is mere employee of the appellant company - penalty set aside. Appeal allowed in part. - C/846 & 847/09 - A/85248-85249/2018 - Dated:- 30-1-2018 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Shri H.G. Dharmadhikari, Advocate - for Appellant Shri Manoj Kumar, Asstt. Commissioner (AR) - for Respondent ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ripa Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik - 2009 (235) ELT 623 (Tri-LB). (b) Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Vs. G.M. Exports - 2012 (279) ELT 493 (Kar.) (c) Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar Vs. ATM International - 2014 (313) ELT 808 (Tri-Del) (d) Craft Studio Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur - 2004 (163) ELT 109 (Tri-Del). 2.1 He further submits that notification envisages in case the goods are not used and removed, the customs duty is required to be paid. Therefore, on the goods so removed from the factory, the appellant paid the customs duty along with interest. Therefore, there is no violation of the notification. Accordingly, there is no question arising for imposition of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inevitable particularly when there is suppression of fact and extended period was invoked under the show-cause notice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharamendra Textiles Processors - 2008 (231) ELT 3 (SC) has held that the mandatory penalty cannot be reduced. Therefore, the penalty under Section 114A, which is pari materia of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, the penalty imposed under Section 114A cannot be reduced or waived. Therefore, the same is upheld. 6. As regards the penalty imposed on the Director of the appellant company under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, we find that the appellant have admittedly paid the duty along with interest and they have also issued invoice in respect of removal of imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
