2009 (8) TMI 223

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....87 (Tri. - Del.)], passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') claiming that the following substantial questions of law would arise for determination of this Court:- "1. Whether the Tribunal can go beyond the statutory provisions as provided under the Central Excise Rules, 2002? 2. Whether the Tribunal can modify the mandatory penalty period of two months provided under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, in cases where it is established that the assessee had defaulted in payment of monthly duty in contravention of the provisions of Rule 8 of the Rules thereby attracting the provisions of Rule 8(3 A) of the Rules?" 2. Facts may first be noticed, which have been ref....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....default in discharge of duty was caused due to the fact that the assessee-respondent company was declared as a sick unit by the BIFR and it has been facing grave financial crisis. It was further pleaded that the duty was already deposited on 18-1-2006 even prior to issuance of show cause notice on 9-3-2006 and passing of order dated 26-7-2006 by the Adjudicating Authority. On 17-8-2006, the Commissioner (Appeals) came to the conclusion that the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority was too harsh and reduced the period of forfeiture from two months to three weeks from the date of communication of order dated 26-7-2006 or till such date all the dues were paid, whichever is later (A-2). 4. The revenue-appellant filed further appeal bef....