2023 (5) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Appellant Shri Amber Kumrawat, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER In this revenue's appeal, revenue seeks to impose equal of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as against the penalty of Rs.1 lakh was imposed by the adjudicating authority. 02. Shri Tara Prakash, learned Deputy Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue submits that the adjudicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alty under Section 11AC cannot be enhanced as appealed by the revenue in the present appeal. 04. We have heard both the sides and perused the records. We find that against the common order, the respondent had also filed an appeal which was disposed of by order dated 15.10.2015 (supra) wherein, the tribunal passed the order as under: 17. However, we find force in the submissions of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....evasion. 18. In the case of Anand Nishikawa Company Ltd Vs CCE Meerut 2005 (185) ELT 149 (SC), the Hon ble Supreme Court observed that there was no deliberate attempt of non-disclosure of excise duty. No claim as to suppression of facts would be entertained for the purpose of invoking extended period of limitation within the meaning of proviso to Section 11A (1) of the Act. It is also not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SC) 19. We find that the Appellant acted under a bonafide belief that the activities undertaken by them would not amount to manufacture. It is the case of interpretation of the provisions of law and therefore, the imposition of penalties on the Appellants are not warranted. It is noted that the goods were available for confiscation. It is well settled that if the goods are available, the ....