2010 (1) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal filed by the department wherein the appellant prays for restoration of the penalty imposed on the respondent by the original authority. There is no representation for the respondent despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. I have examined the records and heard learned JDR who has reiterated the grounds of this appeal. 2. In adjudica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (Rs. 5,011/-) was imposed on the ground that the respondent had, with intent to evade payment of duty to the extent of Rs. 5,011/-, suppressed before the department the non-inclusion of the amortised value of the dies supplied by the buyer and used by the respondent in the manufacture of the goods subsequently cleared to the buyer. The order of adjudication was taken in appeal to the Commissioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rning penalty of Rs. 5,011/-, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the demand of differential duty of Rs. 5,011/- had not been contested by the assessee. It was also noted that the differential amount of duty had been paid before issue of the show-cause notice. However, without any further discussion, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) maintained a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the assessee, ....