TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us dated 01/03/2002, which was amended by N/N. 12/2012-Cus dated 17/03/2012.. Penalty - Held that:- As the language of the notification is clear, which does not allow for benefit of exemption notification and the same has been admitted by the appellant. Therefore, the penalty on the main appellant, namely, Claas India Pvt. Ltd. is rightly imposed - As the entire amount of duty along with interest has been paid prior to issuance of the show-cause notice, therefore, the penalty is reduced to 25% of the duty confirmed. Penalty on Shri Saurabh Gupta, Manager of the appellant company - Held that:- The manager is not going to gain anything by claiming of benefit of notification. In that circumstances, the penalty of Shri Saurabh Gupta is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By way of these appeals, the appellant is seeking waiver of penalty on the ground that it was the issue of interpretation of the terms of the notification, therefore, the penalty imposed on the appellants be waived. 3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as per the understanding of the appellant, there was no end use was required to be submitted by the appellant and these tracks are used for manufacture of combine harvester. As some of the tracks were used as spare parts, therefore, it cannot be termed as these tracks were not used for manufacture of combine harvester. It is his submission that as the appellant has misunderstood the terms of notification. In these circumstances, as there was no malafide intenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vernment of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 21/2002- Customs, dated the 1st March, 2002 Published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 118(E) dated the 1st March, 2002, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods of the description specified in column (3) of the Table below or column (3) of the said Table read with the relevant List appended hereto, as the case may be, and falling within the Chapter, heading, sub-heading or tariff item of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacture of track type combine harvesters; (viii) Sugarcane planter; (ix) Root or tuber crop harvesting machines; (x) Rotary tiller/weeder (B) Parts and components required for manufacture of goods specified at (A) 2.5% - - 6.1 Admittedly, the appellant has imported tracts and the same was required to use for manufacture of tracks type combine harvester. The language of the notification clarifies that these tracks are to be used for manufacture of combine harvester. The contention of the appellant is that the tracks used in the manufacture of combine harvester and tracks used for manufacture of combine harvester are two different te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on and it is only subject to fulfilment of such condition that a benefit can be allowed to any assessee. It cannot be said that introduction of such a condition in the notification was not the intention beyond the drafting of the notification and the same must have been crept in on account of some human error in drafting. There is no material before us to conclude so. As such, we do not find the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as just and proper and set aside the same. 6.3 Now, we come to the issue of imposition of penalty. As the language of the notification is clear, which does not allow for benefit of exemption notification and the same has been admitted by the appellant. Therefore, the penalty on the main appellant, namely, Cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
