TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led for out of turn hearing. Appellants have enclosed a copy of acknowledgement for payment of fee in the form of DD which was handed over to the registry. Since the applicants have already removed the defect, I take up the appeals for disposal. 2.These three appeals are directed against the same Order-in-Appeal No. 161A/2010 - CE dated 31.5.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I), Bangalore 3.The relevant fact that arise for consideration are during the scrutiny of TR-6 Challans by the audit party of CAG, it was noticed that TR-6 Challans wherein an amount of Rs.5,20,000/- was indicated to be credited to the Government account on 31.3.2006, was noticed to have not been credited. Subsequent action and corresponde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2006 and would submit that acknowledgment was given by the bank on 31.3.2006. He would also draw my attention to the bank balance available in appellant companys account on 31.3.2006. He would submit that there was sufficient balance for honouring of cheques. He would submit that the entire demand has arisen because the bank officials had misplaced the cheques which were given to them and it was not noticed by the appellant or by the revenue. He would submit that penalty reduced by the learned Commissioner (A) on the company is also improper as there is no reason for invoking provisions of Section 11AC. He would rely upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Kitply Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut-II - 2009 (243) ELT 209 (Tri.-D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould indicate that the cheques should have been honoured. It is nobodys case that the cheques were dishonoured and there was no balance in the appellants account maintained in the bank. 6.2On this factual matrix, I find that the show cause notice invoking the provisions of Section 11AC for imposition of penalty seems to be misconceived, as the appellant has discharged the entire amount of duty along with interest on 3.1.2009 before the issuance of show cause notice. Honrable Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills - 2009 (238) ELT 3 (SC) has specifically held that provisions of Section 11AC can be invoked if the ingredients of Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 are present. In this case, I find that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erson who acquires possession of, or is in any way concerned in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner deals with, any excisable goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under the Act or these rules, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the duty on such goods or *[two thousand rupees], whichever is greater. [(2)?Any person, who issues (i) an excise duty invoice without delivery of the goods specified therein or abets in making such invoice; or (ii) any other document or abets in making such document, on the basis of which the user of said invoice or document is likely to take or has taken any ineligible benefit under the Act or the....