2018 (10) TMI 1323

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f this Tribunal in the case of Godrej Soaps Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Mumbai [2004 (10) TMI 112 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], wherein Larger Bench held that when demand gets dropped on any account penalty provision cannot survive against the assessee under Rules, 173 Q(1)(a) of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Penalty imposed under 173 Q(1)(a) is not sustainable - appeal dismissed - decided against Re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... igation policy as per the Circular No.390/Misc/116/2017-JC dated 11.07.2018. Hence, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed. As regard the assesse's appeal we find that in the show cause notice the penalty was proposed for contravention of Rule, 52A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. In the adjudication order entire demand of ₹ 18,30,039/- though confirmed but the same was set aside by the Com .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X