2009 (6) TMI 799

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent. [Order]. -  This is an appeal by the Revenue against order-in-appeal No. 252/CE/BPL/2006 dated 5-1-07 passed by CCE (Appeals), Bhopal dismissing the Department's appeal for enhancing the penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 173Q(1) to Rs. 5,000/-, as according to the Department, the minimum penalty imposable under Rule 173Q(1)for contraventions covered under Clauses (a), (b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the learned Departmental Representative and perused the records. The ground on which the Department's appeal has been filed, is that from the wordings of Rule 173Q(1), as it existed during the period of dispute, the minimum penalty as prescribed for contraventions covered by Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Rule 173Q(1) is Rs. 5,000/- and that Commissioner (Appeals) has gone wrong in upholding the ....