2012 (6) TMI 728

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng to Rs. 10,87,186/- beside further penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- under Rule 25(1)(a) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The appellant is engaged in manufacture of biscuits which are subject to excise duty. They have been clearing their final product on payment of excise duty by way of adjustment against their Cenvat credit account and cash payment. Period of dispute is from March 2009 to October 2009. 3. The department issued a show cause notice to the appellant raising the duty demand of Rs. 2,10,87,816/- on the premise that during the disputed period, the appellant has defaulted in payment of excise duty beyond 30 days from the due date as prescribed under Rule 8(3A), as such, he was supposed to pay the excise duty in cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ough Cenvat credit and the defaults which are subject matter of show cause notice occurred due to clerical error and those defaults are negligible as compared to the duty paid to raise an inference that there could be no intention on the part of the appellant to evade the payment of excise duty. Thus, it is argued that Rule 8 (3A) is not attracted as such the impugned order is not sustainable. Learned Counsel has thus pleaded that the appellant has strongly prima facie for waiver and submitted that if the appellant is directed to make pre-deposit of such a huge amount, it will undue hardship to the appellant. In support of his contention, learned Counsel for the appellant has referred to Final Order No. A/60/2012-EX(BR), dated 25-1-2012 of ....