2017 (2) TMI 1030

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sh. V. Gupta, AR- for the respondent Per: Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order confirming the demand of duty along with interest and penalties on both the appellants. 2. The facts of the case are that the factory premises of the appellants were visited on 10.05.2001 and on 23.08.2002. After investigation, it was found that the appellants have mis-utilizin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uting demand of duty and contesting only penalties imposed on the appellants. He submits that the appellant has paid duty along with interest before issuance of the show cause notice. Therefore, as per the proviso of section 11AC of the Act, the penalty on the main party is to be reduced to 25% of duty confirmed which are authorities below has failed to do so. In the circumstances, the light of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... cause notice. Therefore, the appellant was required to be given an option to pay 25% of the duty as penalty, as per the proviso of section 11AC of the Act but the same has not been done by the adjudicating authority. In that circumstances, relying on the decision cited by the appellants here in above and further relying on the case of United Chain Industries and others, we reduced the penalty to ....