2017 (12) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Per: D.N. Panda Submission of the appellant is that as per sub-section (5) of section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, before service of show-cause notice, when an assessee pays duty along with penalty to the extent of 25% of duty, it should not suffer penalty equal to the amount of duty. 2. Learned D.R. says that show-cause notice proposed levy of full dose of penalty equal to the am....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion shall not get any immunity or concession in law when a case attracts proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. Heard both sides and perused the record. 5. Section 11AC of the Act has made provision to impose penalty equal to the amount of duty where duty evasion is made intentionally for any of the reasons stated in the proviso to section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... evasion, there shall be no concession in penalty. 7. The input/output analysis made by adjudicating authority established that appellant failed to show that output was not abnormally lower than the norm. That gave rise to the inference of clandestine removal. Appellant could not come out with clean hands to controvert such inference of Revenue. No material could be placed by it to satisfy Reve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion involved. 9. There was no case of availability of details relating to the transactions available on record. That led to the inference of evasion which could not be rebutted. The decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras relied upon by Revenue in the case of Goyal Ispat Ltd. - 2015 (324) ELT 392 (Mad.) held that the finding of fact by Tribunal does not give rise to question of law and that i....