2011 (9) TMI 419 - AT - Central Excise

Imposition of penalty for the alleged acts of omission and commission assessee prayed for waiver of penalty Held that - When the Revenue disclosed that the omission and commission brought the appellant to the fold of penalty due to fraud committed against Revenue, the appellant has no scope to get the benefit of judgment of the Apex Court because fraud nullifies everything. When fraud nullifies a decree, the appellant should face penalty. -Decided against the assessee.

Issues:
1. Lack of indication of the provision of law for penalty in show cause notice.
2. Applicability of penalty under rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.
3. Alleged fraudulent issuance of invoices without actual delivery of goods.
4. Benefit of judgment in Amrit Foods case.
5. Admissibility of evidence under section 14 of Central Excise Act 1944.
6. Impact of fraud on penalty imposition.
7. Dismissal of the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The appellant raised a concern regarding the show cause notice not specifying the provision of law for the penalty. The authorities later indicated that penalty was proposed under rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant sought waiver of penalty, arguing that past acts should not attract penal consequences following a judgment in Amrit Foods case.

2. The respondent argued that the appellant, by fraudulently claiming cenvat credit without actual movement of goods, was not entitled to the credit. The appellate authority upheld the dismissal of the appeal based on this ground.

3. The appellate order revealed that the appellant's fraudulent actions benefitted another entity. Evidence from the statement of the appellant's director, admitting to the issuance of spurious invoices without actual goods delivery, was considered substantial. The court cited the case of CCE, Mumbai vs. Kalvert Foods India Pvt. Ltd. to emphasize the impact of fraud on legal proceedings.

4. The court highlighted that fraud nullifies all actions emanating from it. Despite the appellant's reliance on the Amrit Foods case, the court emphasized that fraud negates any benefits sought from legal precedents. The appellant's fraudulent actions aimed at enriching another party at the expense of the Revenue, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

5. The court emphasized the importance of evidence under section 14 of the Central Excise Act 1944 in establishing the fraudulent activities of the appellant. The lack of rebuttal evidence during the judicial proceedings further strengthened the case against the appellant.

6. Fraud was deemed as a crucial factor in determining the penalty imposition. The court held that fraudulent actions nullify legal benefits and lead to penalty consequences. The appellant's failure to defend against the fraud allegations resulted in the dismissal of the appeal.

7. Ultimately, the court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the serious implications of fraudulent activities on legal proceedings and penalty imposition. The judgment highlighted the significance of evidence, the impact of fraud, and the legal consequences of fraudulent actions on the appellant's case.

← Previous Next →