2009 (10) TMI 710

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....K. Sharma, JDR, for the Respondent. ORDER This is an Appeal against the Order of the Commissioner, bearing No. 188/Kol-II/2003 dated 21-11-2003. 1.2 Heard both sides. 1.3 The relevant facts in brief are that the Appellants were the manufacturer of Re-rolled Products and were working under the Compounded Levy Scheme. There was an Order of Provisional Determination of Duty Liability whi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 52,535.00 for delayed payment of duty relating to 1-9-97 to 31-3-98 and also imposed another penalty of Rs. 1,32,568.00 for the delayed payment of duty for the month of April, 1998. The Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the Order of the Original Authority. 2. Learned Consultant, Shri Amalendu Chakraborty appearing for the Appellants submits that they cannot be expected to know the enhanced fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the submissions from both sides. The Scheme of Compounded Levy in terms of the provisions of Rule 96ZP, has envisaged the determination of liability by the Commissioner and payment of dues by the assessee, as per the Order of Determination. It is not disputed that for the period from 1-9-97 to 31-3-98, the appellants have paid the duty as per the Order of Provisional Determination. Then the Order ....