2000 (11) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T)]. - The Stay applications and the appeals have come up against the decision of the Commissioner who vide the impugned order against the 100% EOU imposed penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and also demanded duty under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. By the same order, he confirmed the duty on the capital goods under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, has been imposed for failing to fulfil the export obligations. 4. We have heard Shri R. Raghavan, learned Counsel for the appellants and Shri G. Sreekumar, learnerd SDR for the department. Shri Raghavan, Advocate submits that they have got the required extension of time vide letter dated 20-10-2000 from the Joint Development Commissioner, Visakhapatn....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for de novo consideration. 4. Heard Shri G. Sreekumar, learned SDR who submits that there is no objection from his side if the matter is remanded. 5. We have considered the submissions and we take up the stay applications and appeal for final disposal by this order, by granting waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved in this case. We find that penalty under Rule 173Q has been imposed ....