2019 (11) TMI 672

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../2010-DB by proposing the following two questions, stated to be substantial questions of law:- "(1) Whether learned Commissioner, in the facts and circumstances of the case, was right in exercising his discretion, which otherwise is not contemplated, for not imposing penalty as stipulated under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act despite he has held liability under section 11A of the Act? (2) Whether Appellate Tribunal erred in not assigning cogent and independent reasons, while upholding the order of the learned Commissioner, or in other words, whether Appellate Tribunal has committed breach of principle of natural justice by not assigning the reasons while passing impugned order?" 2. The facts stated briefly are that the respon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ailed to do so. It was submitted that the respondent had not submitted the warehousing certificate nor intimated the department about the diversion of the excisable goods till the Superintendent in charge of the consignee vide letter dated 13.1.2004 informed that there is no intimation from the consignee regarding receipt of the goods against CT-3s under the AR-3 issued by the respondent. It was submitted that, therefore, the respondent had suppressed the material facts from the department, and hence, the adjudicating authority was not justified in not imposing penalty under section 11AC of the Act and the Tribunal was not justified in upholding the order passed by the adjudicating authority. 4. A perusal of the order-in-original reveals ....