- (1.) The Tribunal has deleted the penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on two grounds. Firstly that the amount of duty sought was voluntarily deposited by the assessee much before the show cause notice was issued and secondly there was no intentional suppression of facts. The Revenue has proposed the following two questions of law said to be arising out of the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Taxes Appellate Tribunal New Delhi dated, 20-3-06 [2006 (206) E.L.T. 222 (Tri.-Del.)]; (I) "Whether penalty can be exempted under Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 even when the duty was to have been paid before the enactment of Finance Bill, 2001 in view of the statutory restriction provided under Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ?" (II) "Whether penalty can be exempted under Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 even when the [duty] was short paid by virtue of suppression of fact in view of the statutory restriction provided under Explanation 1 of Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ?"
(2.) We have heard Shri Shambho Chopra, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Manu Khare appearing for the respondent.
(3.) From a perusal of the questions reproduced above, we are of the considered opinion that even though the first question can be said to be a question of law but on the findings recorded by the Tribunal that there was no intentional suppression of facts, the penalty having been deleted, the first question can be only of academic interest and therefore, the Court declines to admit the appeal on the aforesaid question. Needless to say the second question raised in the memo of appeal is based on the findings recorded by the Tribunal on appreciation of evidence and material on record and cannot be said to be a question of law. Consequently the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.;