2018 (1) TMI 706

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... respondent ORDER Revenue has filed this appeal on the ground that the impugned order dated 6.4.2017 passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Raipur is not legal and proper, inasmuch as, without proper appreciation of the facts, he has dropped the penalty imposed in the adjudication order. 2. The ld. DR appearing for the appellant submits that in support of dropping the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submits that on appreciation of both facts as well as on law, since the Commissioner (Appeals) has decided that imposition of penalty by the adjudicating authority is not proper, such findings cannot be disturbed at the Tribunal's stage, since those findings were based on the factual matrix. 4. Heard both sides and perused the record. 5. I find that in this case, the ld. Commissioner (Appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....340 MT of MS Angle, but they have not admitted any clandestine removal of the same without payment of central excise duty. Thus, there is nothing on record to prove that the short found quantity of MS Angle was removed clandestinely. Section 11AC(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 authorising levy of penalty, pre-supposes an intention to evade the duty, where any duty has not been levied, or p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ials and finished goods, which may be due to any reason, but in no case, it evident the clandestine manufacture and removal of goods. It no way prove the mala fide intention of the appellant to evade the payment of central excise duty. The decisions cited by the adjudicating authority are found to be distinguishable in as much as in the instant case there is neither any admission of clandestine re....