Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2007 (3) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2007 (3) TMI 58 - AT - Central Excise


Issues involved:
- Common issue of penalty imposition under Rule 96ZQ 5(ii) for delayed payments under Compounded Levy Scheme.

Detailed Analysis:
1. Balakrishna Dyeing & Printing Mills and Singhvi Processors Pvt. Ltd.: The assessees faced a delay in payment due to bank closure and subsequent holidays. The Tribunal applied Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, allowing payment on the next working day. Consequently, the appeals of these two parties were allowed, and corresponding appeals by the Department were rejected.

2. M/s. Dinesh Dyeing & Printing Works, Abhishek Fashions Pvt. Ltd., and Govinda Processors: Despite a one-day delay in payment, the assessees promptly paid the dues the next day due to financial constraints and banking procedures. Citing a similar case precedent, the Tribunal held that penalties should be proportionate to any gain made. The penalty was enhanced in one case and reduced to Rs. 5,000 in others. One appeal by M/s. Dinesh Dyeing & Printing Works was rejected, while the Department's appeal was partly allowed.

3. Harish Silk Mills: Admitting a three-day delay in payment, the assessee paid interest and cited similar reasons as other cases for the delay. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 5,000, and the appeal by the assessee was partly allowed, while the Department's appeal was rejected.

4. Overall Decision: The appeals by Balakrishna Dyeing & Printing Mills and Singhvi Processors Pvt. Ltd. were allowed. The appeal by M/s. Dinesh Dyeing & Printing Works was rejected. Other assessees' appeals were partly allowed, with penalties reduced to Rs. 5,000 each. The Department's appeal was partly allowed in one case, enhancing the penalty to Rs. 5,000, while other Department appeals were rejected.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates