TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red ultra virus by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd. [2014 (12) TMI 585 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - the said decision is having binding force - demand against the appellant is not sustainable. Whether the penalty can be imposed on the appellant or not? - Held that: - the appellant has mis-represented the fact that the duty has been paid as per GAR-7 which was paid lat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een paid as per GAR-7, but the appellant did not produce any GAR-7 to the authorities below. Later on, the amount of GAR-7 was paid by the appellant with interest and the same has been intimated to the Department. Thereafter, a case was made out against the appellant that as they have not produced GAR- 7 Challans as per the returns therefore, they mis-represented the facts to the authorities conse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicated and demands proposed in the show cause notice were confirmed along with interest and penalties were also imposed. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The Ld. AR raised a preliminary objection that as appellant has not paid any amount as confirmed in the impugned order, therefore, the appeal is not to be entertained. 4. Considered the objections raised by the Ld. AR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Hon ble Apex Court but in terms of the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Space Telelink Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of C. ex., Delhi-I reported in 2017 (355) E.L.T. 189 (Delhi), the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Indus Global Ltd. (Supra) is binding, therefore, the demands against the appellant are not sustainable. 6. The Ld. AR subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The next issue is of whether the penalty can be imposed on the appellant or not? 10. I find that in this case, the appellant is mis-represent the fact that the duty has been paid as per GAR-7 which was paid later on, in that circumstances, penalty under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is imposable therefore, a penalty of ₹ 5,000/- is imposed on the appellant. With these terms, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
