2003 (12) TMI 490

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Appellant. Shri A.K. Mondal, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. -  Vide the impugned order, the authorities below have confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 29,59,520/- against the appellants and have imposed personal penalty of Rs. 16,72,700/- on the ground that during the period September, 1997 to January, 1999 and from Feb. '99 to March '99, the ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty amount Rs. 16.72 lakhs imposed upon the appellants under the provisions of Rule 96ZP(3) is not justified. For the above proposition, he relies upon the various decisions of the judicial as also quasi judicial authorities. 3. We have heard Shri A.K. Mondal, ld. SDR appearing for the Revenue. 4. Inasmuch as the appellant is not disputing the duty confirmation and interest, we upho....