2017 (1) TMI 1128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(JUDICIAL) Shri Rajesh Chibber, Advocate for the Appellants Per Mr. Anil Choudhary The appellants are in appeal against order in appeal dated 30/11/2006 by which the penalty imposed under section 11AC of the act read with rule 25 of CER, 2002, have been enhanced. 2. The brief facts are that the appellants manufactures of co extruded multilayer poly films had cleared their manufactured ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellants accepted their mistake and misrepresentation and deposited the differential duty with interest under intimation to Revenue. Thereafter, show cause notice dated 5/9/2005 was issued proposing to demand duty paid short amounting to Rs. 1,68,610/- and Rs. 38,014/- plus Rs. 213/- invoking the extended period of limitation further proposal to appropriate the Excise duty, already deposited with ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ring the description of finished goods. 3. Being aggrieved, the appellants are before this Tribunal. The learned counsel for the appellant urges that it is an admitted fact that the appellants had cleared the goods manufactured and the waste, upon payment of Excise duty on the basis of invoices. It is further admitted fact that the Revenue have not found any quantity cleared, not recorded in th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th the intention to evade, liability to penalty arises. The appellant also placed reliance on the ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amrit foods vs. CCE 2005 (190) ELT 433 wherein the Revenue had preferred appeal before Tribunal setting aside the imposition of penalty under Rule 173Q of CER, 1944. The Tribunal had set aside the order of Commissioner on the ground that neither the s....