2015 (8) TMI 1229 - HC - Central Excise

Legality of imposition of amount of penalty - Held that - whether there is infraction of provisions of law, wilful or otherwise and whether there was any mens rea is factual, which requires adjudication by the authority below - Held that - Since appellant herein had no such opportunity of urging the same, we feel that it would be in the best interest of parties as also justice that an opportunity of hearing, which is fair and complete, is afforded to them, for addressing the Tribunal on all issues. - Penalty set aside - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Legality of imposition of penalty under the Central Excise Act.

Analysis:
The High Court addressed the single issue in the appeal concerning the legality of the penalty imposed under the Central Excise Act. It was noted that the appellant had challenged the penalty order before the Commissioner Appeals, but the appellant was not given an opportunity to be heard before the Appellate Tribunal passed the impugned order. The Court highlighted the lack of information regarding whether the respondents were served for the hearing date. The Court emphasized that the determination of whether there was a violation of the law, whether it was intentional, and the presence of mens rea are factual matters that need to be examined by the lower authority. Since the appellant was deprived of the opportunity to address these issues, the Court deemed it necessary for a fair and complete hearing to be conducted by the Tribunal to ensure justice for all parties involved.

The appellant's counsel did not contest the excisable duty imposed by the Revenue but raised concerns solely regarding the penalty and interest. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated 20-3-2009 and remanded the matter back to the appellate authority for a fresh consideration on the limited point of penalty.

Both parties agreed to appear before the Tribunal on a specified date, and the Court urged the Tribunal to decide the appeal within two months following the appearance. With these directions and observations, the Court disposed of the present appeal and any pending applications, if applicable. A copy of the judgment was ordered to be provided expeditiously.