2014 (8) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. This stay application and the appeal have been filed by the appellant with respect to OIA No.AHM-EXCUS-003-APP-350-13-14, dt.12.02.2014. 2. The issue involved in these proceedings is imposition of penalties upon the appellant under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 for late filing of ER-1 returns. 3. Shri M.A. Patel (Consultant) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that on-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Pvt.Ltd. & Others Vs CCE Vapi (supra). 4. Shri Alok Srivastava (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that appellant is habitual in late filing of ER-1 returns. That the adjudicating authority has been genuine in imposing penalty for each months delay and imposition of penalty started with a penalty of Rs. 2,000/- per month in June 2012 and was gradually increased to Rs. 5,000/- for la....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erved from this relied upon case-law that the appeal in that case was decided with respect to the default in payment of monthly dues under Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, therefore, the same cannot be made applicable to the proceedings of late filing of ER-1 returns under Rule 12 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. It is also observed from the show cause notice dt.27.06.2013 that appellant wa....