2004 (6) TMI 575 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order-in-appeal regarding penalty imposition.
- Interpretation of penalty imposition under Central Excise Act.
- Comparison of different sets of rules under Compounded Levy Scheme.
- Applicability of previous court decision on penalty imposition.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the imposition of a penalty on the respondents. The respondents, engaged in manufacturing hot-rolled non-alloy products, failed to pay Central Excise duty as determined by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The adjudicating authority imposed a penalty, which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) citing a previous decision by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Beauty Dyers v. Union of India & Ors. The Commissioner (Appeals) based the decision on the grounds that the rules formulated under the Compounded Levy Scheme were set aside in the mentioned case.

The Revenue contended that the rules set aside by the Hon'ble Madras High Court were specific to Hot Air Stenter Independent Textiles Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, whereas the present case pertained to compounded levy on iron and steel governed by a different set of rules. The Tribunal noted that the decision of the Madras High Court did not pertain to hot re-rolling Annual Determination Rules, thus finding the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision unsustainable. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal found that a penalty of Rs. 10,000 would meet the ends of justice. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed, and a penalty of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the respondents.