2013 (6) TMI 297 - AT - Central Excise

Payment of duty from cenvat credit - whether the appellant was required to discharge the duty liability from PLA only - Appellants are only disputing the penalty as the duty amount already stands paid from PLA - Held that - As relying on case of Harish Silk Industries 2013 (6) TMI 83 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT only penalty under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 will be imposable in each case of default and the penalty imposed under Rule 25 of the Rules is required to be set-aside.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of penalty provisions under Central Excise Rules, 2002 regarding duty payment from cenvat credit.

Detailed analysis:
The judgment by Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad dealt with the issue of penalty imposition under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 concerning the payment of duty from cenvat credit. The appellant was required to discharge duty liability from PLA due to a default under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant did not contest the duty liability from PLA but disputed the penalty. The appellant cited various judgments, including the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Harish Silk Industries 2013 (288) ELT 74 (Guj.), which highlighted the application of Rule 27 for penalty in cases of default under Rule 8. The High Court's decision emphasized that for such defaults, the penalty should be under Rule 27, where the maximum penalty is five thousand rupees. The Tribunal considered the facts and circumstances, emphasizing the smallness of the amount involved and decided not to disturb the order passed by the Tribunal.

The respondent, on the other hand, relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Elson Packaging Industries Pvt. Limited 2010 (257) ELT 509 (Guj.) to argue that penalties were rightly imposed. However, the Tribunal observed that the judgment in the Elson Packaging Industries case pertained to different rules (Rule 57A to 57V of Credit Scheme and Rules) and determined that the latest judgment in the Harish Silk Industries case was more applicable to the present circumstances. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that only penalties under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 would be applicable in cases of default, and penalties imposed under Rule 25 needed to be set aside. As a result, the appeals were allowed based on these findings.