TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (1) TMI 606
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This appeal has been preferred against the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 31-5-2001 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the Order-in-Original, in respect of confirmation of duty with equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC but reduced the redemption fine as detailed therein. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds without any duty paying documents. 2. The adjudicating authority consequently, confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 64,363/- with equal penalty amount under Section 11AC along with interest under Section 11AB and further ordered the confiscation of the plant and machinery under Rule 173Q with an option to get the same redeemed on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/-. The adjudicating au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty. Ld. Counsel has contended that there was no wilful/deliberate suppression of facts by the appellants from the department, but it was only a case of mistake on their part that they cleared the consignment without paying differential duty. Therefore, according to the Counsel, the penalty under Section 11AC should not be equal to the amount of duty rather it should be less. 7. Ld. JDR, on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder Rule 173Q, we find that the impugned order, prima facie, cannot be sustained as bare perusal of sub-rule (2) of Rule 173Q shows that such a confiscation could be ordered only if the duty involved was over Rs. l lakh. In the instant case, the duty involved was only Rs. 64,363/-. The provisions of Rule 173Q for confiscation of plant and machinery could not be invoked. Therefore, we set aside th....