TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 294
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Revenue that the appellants had sought paid excise duty amounting to Rs. 4,16,779/- and Rs. 5,67,089/- as they were not having sufficient balance in their account current as well as in their Cenvat credit account. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants demanding the total duty of Rs. 9,83,868/- including cesses along with interest and proposing penalty of equivalent amount under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The matter was adjudicated and the entire demand of duty was confirmed along with interest and penalty of equivalent amount was imposed under Rule 25 read with Section 11AC of the Act. Penalties of Rs. 5,00,000/- each were also imposed on the two dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. Advocate further states that there is no allegation in show cause notice about fraud, suppression, mis-declaration or intent to evade. 4. Ld. A.R. reiterated the findings in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) and submitted a letter from the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner confirming that the appellants had paid the duty of Rs. 9,83,868/-. He stated that the payment of interest by the appellants is not confirmed and they are required to pay the interest. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the record. 6. I find that as the Ld. Advocate for the appellants is not disputing the liability of duty and interest thereon till the date of payment of duty, the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the demand of duty and interest t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under Rule 25 read with Section 11AC of the Act is not invocable and also held that such contravention would attract penal provisions of Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 which provides for maximum penalty of Rs. 5000/-. The relevant findings of the Tribunal in para 5 and 6 are reproduced below: "5. We find that Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 provides for imposition of penalties which shall not exceed the duty on the excisable goods, when there is contravention of the nature referred to in clause (a), clause (b), clause (c) or clause (d). We find that clause (a) of Rule 25 refers to removal of excisable goods in contravention of any of the provisions of the rules. Admittedly when the goods were removed, no excise duty was re....