COMMISSIONER OF C. EX Vs. KITPLY INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It appears that the respondent has to deposit the duty within specified time. The respondent has given the cheque for the deposit of the amount. The cheque appears to have been dishonoured? The case of the respondent is that when the respondent came to know that the cheque has been dishonoured, the respondent deposited the said amount along with interest on 23-3-2007. However, after the deposit of the amount, show cause notice has been issued on 11-5-2007 as to why penalty should not be levied and on consideration of the reply of the assessee, the penalty has been levied. The matter went to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order has deleted the penalty. The Tribunal on the facts and circumstances held that it is case of bona fide mistake on the part of the respondent. In view of the cheque being not honoured, there is removal without payment of duty as stipulated under Rule 8. However, this cannot be treated as attracting the provisions of Section 11AC with an intent to evade payment of duty. The Tribunal further observed that there is failure on the part of the assessee in ensuring that the credit taken in PLA was supported by the genuine payment which resulted in removal without payment of duty due. Having regard to this fact, the penalty has been reduced to Rs. 5,000/-.

(2.) We do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal, which requires any interference by this Court. The finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact, based on the appreciation of the evidence and the material on record. No substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. In the result, the appeal fails and is accordingly, dismissed.