2005 (9) TMI 378

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Manoj Kumar Srivastava, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - These appeals filed by an assessee under the Central Excise Act, 1944, & partner of the firm, and Revenue, against the same order of CCE (A), The appeals are being disposed by this common order, after hearing both sides. 2. A case of removal of inputs, on which credit was availed, was made out on the assessee, as on the date....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....v)    Penalty under Rule 209A not be imposed on the partner. 2.2 The Jt. Commissioner, adjudicated the case and, (i)      did not uphold the liability of confiscation under Rule 173Q(2)(a) as proposed. (ii)     Confirmed the duty amount of Rs. 1,51,44/- under Rule 57-I read with Rule 9(2) and Section 11A along with interest ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-. (iii)    No findings were arrived as regards the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the partner. and the appeals were disposed accordingly. 2.4 (i)  Revenue is in appeal against the reduction of penalty under Section 11AC and setting aside of penalty under Rule 173Q. (ii)     Assessee wants the setting aside of penalty under Section 11AC and orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has been set aside by the CCE (A) only on grounds of leniency. Penalty under Rule 173Q(1), if liable has to be imposed, discretion could be exercised up to the minimum of Rs. 5,000/- stipulated therein. Discretion exercised by Jt. Commissioner cannot be found fault with CCE (A)'s order setting aside of Rs. 25,000/- penalty is therefore not upheld, the penalty order under Rule 173Q(1) Rs. 25000/- ....