2017 (3) TMI 778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The original authority, vide his order dated 23.06.2009, confirmed the demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 28,35,468/- along with interests and penalty of an equal amount. ii. Imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- on Shri Rakesh Bhargava, Partner of M/s Cooper Pharma. iii. The goods value of Rs. 93,29,605/- seized from the godown of M/s Dynamic laboratories Pvt Ltd. The same was permitted to be released on payment of Excise duty as well as redemption fine of Rs. 25 lakhs. iv. A penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs imposed on M/s Dynamic Laboratories. v. Imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on Shri Abhishek Bhargava, Director of Dynamic laboratories Pvt ltd. 3. When the issue was challenged in appeal before the Commissi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion on the part of the respondent. Hence, we are of the view that this differential duty has arisen only as a result of a mistake in the calculation made by the respondent. In such cases, the Revenue is expected to raise demand under Section 11A within the normal time limit. Accordingly, we uphold the demand falling within the normal time limit and vacate the remaining portion of demand. Penalty imposable under Section 11AC is also set aside. 7. Demand to the extent of Rs. 7,74,558/- has been raised in respect of the product "Noophin Injection". Revenue has alleged that such injections were cleared with MRP of Rs. 15/- by the respondents and not at the MRP of Rs. 7.2 as declared in the invoices issued by the respondent. The basis for all....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bove paragraph, the respondent's argument is that the evidence based on which the MRP of Rs. 15 has been adopted has not been shared with the respondent. Consequently, this demand cannot be sustained. 10. Demand of Rs. 1,86,042/- has been raised for the product "Dyna Pro Powered". Revenue was of the view that assessment of these product needs to be done under Section 4A whereas the assessee was of the view that it should be under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand on account of time bar for the period beyond normal time period. Such a view adopted the Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld. 11. Goods totally valued at 93,29,605/- have been seized at the godown of M/s Dynamic laboratory pvt l....