2022 (3) TMI 860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Prabhudesai, Superintendent, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER Appellant is absent. A request letter for adjournment of the case has been received from it on the ground that its previous conducting Counsel has expired and it is in the process of appointing of a new Advocate. Simultaneously appellant has made a request in writing expressing its willingness to pay the penalty of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llector of Customs, Bombay [1988 (36) ELT 369 (SC)] (v) Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs. Dilip Kumar & Company [2018 (361) ELT 577 (SC)] 3. On perusal of the case record, it is observed that duty of Rs. 1,45,700/- that has been confirmed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 05.01.2012 had been paid by the appellant on dated 02.03.2012. The operating portion of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0/- under Rule 25(1) (d) of Central excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. 1944. 4. Appellant paid the confirmed demand under protest and now express its willingness to pay the penalty of Rs. 1,45,700/-. Rest of demands were dropped and what is required to be realised is interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act on confirmed demand. As reveals from the ca....