2011 (6) TMI 577 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay for 74 days in filing the appeal - appellant was under the impression that only one appeal may be filed because there is only one Order-in-Appeal. However, the adjudication order as well as Order-in-Appeal was in respect of two separate show-cause notices dated 1.9.2008 and 13.10.2008 and, therefore, the Registry directed them to file two separate appeals. Due to this process, the delay was caused Held that - issue does not involve any revenue loss but only a violation of a procedural rule. However, it is not proper to condone the matter on the ground that it is only violation of a procedure because if such argument is accepted all procedural rule will become meaningless and Government will not be able to frame any procedure, which may be necessary in public interest, is necessary, penalty reduced, COD application, stay application and appeal are disposed of

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing the appeal, imposition of penalty under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, reduction of penalty amount.

Condonation of Delay: The appellant sought condonation of a 74-day delay in filing the appeal due to confusion regarding the need to file separate appeals for two distinct show-cause notices. The Tribunal, after considering the genuineness of the submissions, allowed the condonation of delay and permitted the COD application.

Imposition of Penalty: The appellant, a Central Excise assessee, failed to electronically deposit excise duty as required by Rule 8(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, instead paying in cash under TR-6 challan. A penalty of Rs.15,000/- was imposed under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, exceeding the maximum permissible penalty of Rs.5,000/-. The Tribunal found the penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority and confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) to be excessive and not maintainable. Despite the violation being procedural without revenue loss, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of upholding procedural rules in the public interest. While mens rea is not required for penalty under Rule 27, the Tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs.3,000/- considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

Conclusion: The Tribunal disposed of the COD application, stay application, and appeal by allowing the condonation of delay, reducing the penalty amount to Rs.3,000/-, and emphasizing the significance of procedural compliance even in the absence of mens rea.