2018 (6) TMI 1480

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or respondent ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PUN-EXCUS- 001-APP-627/2017-18 dated 07.11.2017. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue that falls for consideration in this appeal is only regarding the equivalent amount of penalty imposed on the appellant under the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been confirmed against the appellant which is equal to 8% of the total price of the exempted final goods cleared. It is the finding of the first appellate authority that basic ingredients of imposition of penalty under section 11AC of the said Act are present in both the cases. In my considered view, the first appellate authority has misconstrued the remand proceeding. It is noticed that the first....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lauses of notification. The adjudicating authority in the impugned order has clearly recorded that on being pointed out, the appellant had discharged the said amount on 27.09.2003. On reading the provisions during the relevant period, I find the provision of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 13 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 were not made applicable to the demands raised for rev....