2009 (11) TMI 771

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent. ORDER This is an appeal filed by the Revenue seeking to restore an order of the original authority vacated by the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The respondent M/s. ACD Communications Pvt. Ltd., Yanam, (ACD for short) engaged in the manufacture of telecom equipment had cleared their finished goods during 1-10-2003 to 31-1-04 on sale to M/s. BSNL under a contract. As p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rance of the goods and the date of payment of differential duty. He also imposed penalty on ACD under Rule 25(1)(a) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The amount of interest and penalty confirmed against the respondent was Rs. 83,000/- each. 2. In the appeal filed by the Revenue, it is submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had vacated the order of the original authority relying on the decis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessment. In the instant case, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the respondent had made payment at the time of clearance of the goods on a provisional basis; interest was legally payable. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of H.V. Axler Ltd. v. CCE, Ranchi [2007 (215) E.L.T. 70 (Tri. - Kol.)] relied on by the Commissioner (Appeals) was overruled by a Larger Bench of the Tribunal in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the Cadbury India case (supra). However, we find that the penalty imposed on the respondent is not justified. Assessee had paid duty on the differential amount as soon as the same was realized. It cannot be held that the respondent had committed any breach of provisions deliberately. Moreover the appeal has not raised any ground justifying the penalty. Penalty cannot be imposed in the absence ....