SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

S.L.PEERAN
Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai – Appellant
Versus
JKON Engg. (P. ) Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Smt. R. Bhagyadevi,M.V. Raman

ORDER

Per S.L. Peeran :

The appeal by the revenue and a cross appeal by the assessee both arises from the Order in Appeal No. 61/2002 dt. 27/03/02. Before the Commissioner the only question raised by the assessee was with regard to the imposition by the mandatory penalty of Rs. 6,56,636/- under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act'1944. The Order in Original had dropped the penal proceedings initiated under other provisions of the C.E. Act Rules. Against the dropping of penal proceedings under Rule 173Q, the revenue had not filed any appeal before the Commissioner. The Commissioner in the impugned order accepted the assessee's plea that there was no intention to evade payment of duty and the duty had been paid on 16.05.2001 much before the date of issue of Show Cause Notice dt. 25.05.2001. While setting aside the mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Act, and interest claimed under Section 11AB of the Act, he followed the Tribunal's ruling rendered in the case of Amritsar Crown Caps (P) Ltd. reported in 2001 (46) RLT 169 (CEGAT)=2002 (140) ELT 437 (T). However, inadvertently, he noted that the penalty imposed under Rule 173Q was only a nominal penalty and hence he took a lenien

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top