Tribunal modifies Order-in-Appeal, sets aside demands and penalties under Central Excise Act

The Tribunal partially allowed the appeals by setting aside the confirmed demands and penalties, modifying the Order-in-Appeal accordingly. The dismissal of appeals under the litigation policy without delving into merits was upheld, and the Tribunal agreed with the appellant's arguments regarding repetitive demands and penalties, ultimately setting them aside based on provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

---

---

Issues:
- Dismissal of appeals under litigation policy without delving into merits
- Appeals against Order-in-Appeal No. 86-90-CE/LKO/2009
- Confirmation of demand and penalties by Original Authority
- Appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) and subsequent modifications
- Arguments regarding confirmed demands and penalties
- Consideration of arguments by the Tribunal and final decision

Dismissal under Litigation Policy:
The appeals regarding disputed amounts covered by the CBEC's litigation policy were dismissed without a detailed examination of the case's merits.

Appeals Against Order-in-Appeal:
Two appeals were filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 86-90-CE/LKO/2009 issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Lucknow.

Confirmation of Demand and Penalties:
The Original Authority confirmed a demand of certain amounts as Central Excise duty and imposed penalties on the manufacturer and the director. The Commissioner (Appeals) modified the demand and penalties in the subsequent Order-in-Appeal.

Appeal and Modifications:
Both appellants approached the Tribunal challenging the Order-in-Appeal. The Tribunal considered the arguments and modified the decision regarding confirmed demands and penalties.

Arguments and Decision:
The appellant's counsel argued that certain demands were repetitive and already covered in a payment not pressed during the appeal. It was contended that the penalty should be set aside based on the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's arguments, setting aside the confirmed demands and penalties imposed on the manufacturer and director.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeals by setting aside the confirmed demands and penalties, modifying the Order-in-Appeal accordingly.

---