2015 (12) TMI 1352 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of cum duty benefit - Penalty u/s 11AC - Clandestine removal of goods - Held that - There is no need to go into the facts of the case. Hence, the demand of duty alongwith interest and penalties imposed under Section 11AC against both the Assessees are upheld. The Appellant is entitled for the option to pay penalty 25% of the duty as per the provisions of the Act. - Appellants are directly involved in the clandestine removal of the goods and therefore, penalties imposed under the Rule 26 of the Rules would be warranted. The words in any manner in Rule 26 of the Rules has wide amplitude and covered. The Appellants herein were directly involved in clandestine removal of goods. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Dhanlaxmi Garments (2008 (4) TMI 296 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD) is in the context of the removal of the goods under CT-3 certificate and the said case law would not be applicable in the present case. We agree with submission of the learned Advocate that the appeal filed by Shri Matadin N. Sharma is to be abated as the Appellant died. Revenue filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for extending cum duty benefit. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Delhi Vs Maruti Udyog Ltd - 2002 (2) TMI 101 - Supreme Court , held that the cum-duty benefit would be extended. - demand of duty alongwith interest and penalty on M/s Sarla Polyester Ltd and M/s Satidham Industries Ltd are upheld. The Assessees are given option to pay penalty 25% of the duty alongwith entire amount of duty and interest within 30 days from the date of communication of this order. The penalties imposed on Shri Matadin N. Sharma are abated - Appeal disposed of.

Issues:
1. Demand of duty along with interest and penalties against two companies
2. Appeal against penalties imposed on the companies and other individuals
3. Abatement of appeal due to the death of an individual
4. Extension of cum-duty benefit

Analysis:

Issue 1: Demand of duty along with interest and penalties against two companies
The Appellate Tribunal noted that two companies, both 100% EOU engaged in manufacturing Polyester Texturised Yarn, were subjected to a demand of duty amounting to specific sums along with interest and penalties. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Adjudication order, with the cum-duty benefit extended to the Assessee. The Assessees did not contest the demand of duty, and the penalties imposed under Section 11AC were upheld. The Tribunal ruled that the Assessee had the option to pay 25% of the duty as per the provisions of the Act.

Issue 2: Appeal against penalties imposed on the companies and other individuals
The penalties imposed on various individuals directly involved in the clandestine removal of goods were detailed. The Appellants were found to be directly engaged in such activities, justifying the penalties under Rule 26 of the Rules. The Tribunal emphasized that the penalties imposed under Rule 26 were warranted due to the active involvement of the Appellants in the clandestine removal of goods. The appeal filed by a deceased individual was abated, and the penalties imposed on other Appellants were reduced based on the specific amounts outlined in the judgment.

Issue 3: Abatement of appeal due to the death of an individual
The Tribunal recognized the death of an individual involved in the case and ruled to abate the appeal concerning that individual. The presentation of the death certificate supported this decision, ensuring that the legal proceedings were appropriately adjusted in light of the individual's passing.

Issue 4: Extension of cum-duty benefit
The Revenue had filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the extension of cum-duty benefit. Citing a precedent from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal held that the cum-duty benefit should be extended. This decision was based on legal principles established in previous cases, ensuring consistency and adherence to legal standards.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the demand of duty along with interest and penalties against the companies, provided specific rulings on penalties imposed on individuals involved in clandestine activities, abated the appeal of a deceased individual, and extended the cum-duty benefit as per legal precedents. The comprehensive analysis of each issue involved in the judgment demonstrates a thorough consideration of the legal aspects and implications of the case.

← Previous Next →