9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (2) TMI 521 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal confirming demand of Cenvat credit and interest on sugar. 2. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal upholding demand of Cenvat credit and reducing penalty. Issue 1: The appeals arose from an Order-in-Appeal confirming the demand of Cenvat credit and interest on sugar by the Commissioner (A) after the Deputy Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise ordered the demand. The Deputy Commissioner had dropped penal provisions as the demands were paid before the show cause notice. The Commissioner (A) upheld the Revenue's contention for imposing the penalty despite various judgments favoring the assessee. The assessee cited multiple rulings and larger bench rulings setting aside penalties under relevant sections. The Commissioner, however, did not grant relief, leading to the appeal. Issue 2: The second appeal challenged an Order-in-Appeal that upheld the demand of Cenvat credit and reduced the penalty amount. The appellant argued that penalties for instances where duty was paid before the show cause notice had reached finality per Apex Court's confirmation of relevant Tribunal rulings. The appellant emphasized that judgments contrary to the Apex Court's decision hold no effect. The Commissioner's imposition of penalties was contested based on the binding effect of the Karnataka High Court judgment and the need to set aside the penalties. In delivering the judgment, the Member highlighted the importance of adhering to judgments of higher courts and tribunals. The Member noted that once the Apex Court confirmed the view that penalties are not necessary when duty is paid before the show cause notice, it was improper for lower courts or tribunals to overrule such decisions. The Member emphasized being bound by the judgments of the Karnataka High Court and Larger Bench of the Tribunal, along with the Supreme Court's rulings. Consequently, the Commissioner's orders imposing penalties were deemed unlawful, leading to the setting aside of all appeals.
|
