1990 (12) TMI 219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut payment of Central Excise duty, on the strength of a B-1 General Bond. The penalties had been imposed by the Additional Collector exercising the powers under Rule 14A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. Shri A.C. Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellants argued their case when the appeal was heard. He referred to the submissions contained in the appeal and stressed the fact that the delay on their part in submission of the proof of export was due to factors beyond their control. The penalty imposed is very harsh. He submitted a copy of an order passed by this Regional Bench itself on a similar matter relating to their sister concern where the penalties imposed by the authorities were first reduced by the Central Board of Excise & Cust....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nterests as they could not get the credits replenished in their Running Bond account promptly and they had nothing to gain by the delayed submission of the said proof. It was only a technical lapse and pardonable in view of the Supreme Court dictum in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. The State of Orissa, reported in 1978 (2) E.L.T. J 159. The Additional Collector failed to appreciate the magnitude of the abnormally prevailing in their establishment and the manpower shortage when he held that they could have filed proof of export since they could export the goods. As the goods were exported in time in all the cases, there was no duty liability and no need for imposing the maximum permissible penalty in different cases. The show cause noti....