2007 (11) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri A.K. Rastogi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellant filed this appeal against imposition of penalty of Rs. 93,025.00 under Rule 96ZP(3) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules 1944. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants were liable to discharge their duty liability of Rs. 93,025.00 within 10th March 1999. In this instant case, the appellant discharged ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mits that Clause 2 of proviso to Rule 96ZP(3) liability to pay interest on the outstanding amount of duty as on 10th day of such month. He submits that the adjudicating authority rightly imposed penalty on the outstanding amount of duty as on 10th day of such months. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find force in the submission of the learned advocate. For t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....om the 11th day of such month. Regarding the payment of penalty, it appears that he shall be liable to pay penalty on the amount of duty outstanding from him at the end of such month. Thus, the liability to pay of penalty is on the amount of duty outstanding from the manufacturer at the end of such month. In the present case, it is seen there is no outstanding of duty from the appellant at the end....