TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (1) TMI 25
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....13/-. The appellants are not challenging the demand of duty as confirmed by the Adjudicating authority. The appellants are engaged in the processing of man made fabrics. The Central Excise officers visited the appellant factory premises on 16-5-2002 and on physical verification which was conducted in the presence of Shri Gyan Chand Dhariwal, partner, it was found that there was shortage of 12,074 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st which the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. A-53. The appellant also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble MP High Court in the case of Sai Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd. [2006 (203) E.L.T. 15 (M.P.)] and submitted that the Tribunal has discretion to reduce the penalty. 3. The learned DR stated that in the case of Machino Montell reported in [2004 (168) E.L.T. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ods without payment of duty. When the Revenue pointed out that they are not entitled for the benefit of notification, the assessee paid the duty and starting clearing the goods on payment of duty. In this situation, it was held that it is not a case of imposition of penally. In the present case, the goods were cleared without payment of duty and it is a fact that is admitted by the appellants. In ....