2009 (7) TMI 950

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Mall, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the challenge is against imposition of penalty to the extent of 100% of duty upon the appellant. He submits that the unit was having financial difficulty and was taken over by new management and during the verification of the records, new management found that previous managem....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules during the relevant time and he also cited the decisions of the Tribunal in support of his contention that in such cases exemplary penalty is to be imposed. At this stage, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that Rule 8(3A) came into force w.e.f. June, 2006 and therefore it was not applicable to the present case at all. However, he fairly agr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is another decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Allahabad v. R.K. Cigarettes (P) Ltd. reported in 2007 (213) E.L.T. 367 (Tribunal) = 2007 (3) LCX 22 that where returns are filed showing clearances and amounts of duty payable, there cannot be any mala fide intention to evade payment of duty. In such a scenario penalty under Rule 27 gets attracted. 3. Inasmuch as in the present case t....