TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Appeal, has proposed the following questions of law for the consideration of this Court :- [A] Whether or not benefit of reduced penalty under proviso to Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 can be extended to such person who has not paid amount of interest payable under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ?" [B] Whether or not benefit of reduced penalty under proviso to Secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... [E] Whether the impugned order made by the Tribunal can be said to be an order in accordance with law ?" [F] Whether or not in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in confirming the order passed by the appellate commissioner, reducing penalty to 25% of the duty amount on the respondent and rejecting appeal of the Revenue ?" Heard learned c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of M/s. Swati Chemicals Industries & Ors. The impugned order of CESTAT dated 1st April 2010 is in challenge before this Court, proposing the aforementioned questions of law. Although the issues raised are many, essentially, there is a single issue challenging the use of discretion of allowing the assessee-respondent to pay 25% of the duty towards penalty within thirty days - replying on the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penalty of 25% were not paid by the respondent-assessee, the adjudicating authority may send a communication to the respondent-assessee indicating therein that the particular amount of interest and/or 25% of the penalty of the duty amount is not paid by the respondent-assessee and hence if the assessee wants to avail the benefit of the reduced penalty of 25%, such amount of interest and/or penalty....