Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + Commission Central Excise - 2006 (5) TMI Commission This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (5) TMI 346 - Commission - Central Excise
Issues:
Settlement of additional duty, waiver of interest, immunity from penalty, waiver of prosecution under Section 32E of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Analysis: 1. Settlement of Additional Duty: The applications were filed seeking settlement of additional duty, waiver of interest, and immunity from penalty based on a show-cause notice issued by DGCEI, Kolkata. The duty amount was initially stated at Rs. 7,14,866/-, but during the admission hearing, the applicant submitted that the duty amount would be Rs. 7,15,029/-. The applicant admitted the fault and deposited the entire duty liability. 2. Waiver of Interest and Penalty: The Respondent Commissioner submitted a report stating that immunities may not be granted in this case. The applicant, represented by an advocate, argued for waiver of interest and immunity from penalty and prosecution. The advocate highlighted that the applicant is a declared sick industry implementing a revival package sanctioned by BIFR. The applicant cooperated with the Department and disclosed the full additional duty liability, seeking leniency. 3. Consideration of Immunities: After hearing both parties and reviewing the submissions and records, the Commission found that the applicant had admitted and deposited the entire C.E. duty. Considering the financial position of the applicant, cooperation during the proceedings, and true disclosure, the Commission decided to settle the case in terms of Section 32K of the Act. Immunity was granted from interest exceeding Rs. 15,448/-, full penalty, personal penalty to the co-applicant, and prosecution. 4. Final Orders: The Commission directed the Revenue to appropriate the deposited amounts accordingly. Immunity from interest in excess of Rs. 15,448/- was granted, along with full immunity from penalty, personal penalty, and prosecution. The order specified that non-fulfillment of conditions within the specified time or fraud/misrepresentation would void the order. The case was disposed of based on the granted immunities and settlements.
|