Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2008 (1) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2008 (1) TMI 296 - HC - Central Excise


  1. 2018 (10) TMI 267 - HC
  2. 2018 (7) TMI 2333 - HC
  3. 2017 (8) TMI 106 - HC
  4. 2017 (8) TMI 591 - HC
  5. 2017 (2) TMI 1386 - HC
  6. 2016 (12) TMI 1279 - HC
  7. 2015 (12) TMI 443 - HC
  8. 2015 (10) TMI 509 - HC
  9. 2015 (10) TMI 374 - HC
  10. 2014 (9) TMI 291 - HC
  11. 2013 (8) TMI 539 - HC
  12. 2013 (6) TMI 87 - HC
  13. 2012 (6) TMI 697 - HC
  14. 2012 (5) TMI 12 - HC
  15. 2012 (2) TMI 103 - HC
  16. 2011 (11) TMI 65 - HC
  17. 2011 (8) TMI 423 - HC
  18. 2010 (12) TMI 50 - HC
  19. 2010 (10) TMI 1027 - HC
  20. 2010 (2) TMI 676 - HC
  21. 2010 (2) TMI 829 - HC
  22. 2010 (2) TMI 630 - HC
  23. 2010 (2) TMI 1148 - HC
  24. 2010 (2) TMI 1053 - HC
  25. 2010 (2) TMI 971 - HC
  26. 2010 (2) TMI 560 - HC
  27. 2010 (2) TMI 494 - HC
  28. 2010 (1) TMI 1206 - HC
  29. 2010 (1) TMI 518 - HC
  30. 2009 (11) TMI 293 - HC
  31. 2009 (4) TMI 72 - HC
  32. 2023 (3) TMI 1007 - AT
  33. 2022 (12) TMI 561 - AT
  34. 2020 (8) TMI 693 - AT
  35. 2020 (2) TMI 907 - AT
  36. 2019 (7) TMI 115 - AT
  37. 2019 (5) TMI 653 - AT
  38. 2019 (1) TMI 978 - AT
  39. 2018 (12) TMI 1029 - AT
  40. 2018 (12) TMI 1470 - AT
  41. 2018 (2) TMI 943 - AT
  42. 2017 (9) TMI 1426 - AT
  43. 2017 (4) TMI 146 - AT
  44. 2017 (3) TMI 720 - AT
  45. 2017 (3) TMI 617 - AT
  46. 2017 (6) TMI 945 - AT
  47. 2016 (11) TMI 1219 - AT
  48. 2017 (3) TMI 1122 - AT
  49. 2016 (3) TMI 522 - AT
  50. 2015 (9) TMI 1079 - AT
  51. 2016 (1) TMI 60 - AT
  52. 2015 (2) TMI 1147 - AT
  53. 2015 (3) TMI 81 - AT
  54. 2015 (5) TMI 165 - AT
  55. 2015 (1) TMI 410 - AT
  56. 2014 (12) TMI 87 - AT
  57. 2014 (11) TMI 244 - AT
  58. 2014 (7) TMI 705 - AT
  59. 2014 (7) TMI 76 - AT
  60. 2014 (3) TMI 204 - AT
  61. 2014 (3) TMI 202 - AT
  62. 2013 (10) TMI 1273 - AT
  63. 2013 (11) TMI 985 - AT
  64. 2013 (11) TMI 984 - AT
  65. 2014 (6) TMI 384 - AT
  66. 2014 (6) TMI 340 - AT
  67. 2013 (8) TMI 52 - AT
  68. 2013 (8) TMI 685 - AT
  69. 2013 (4) TMI 525 - AT
  70. 2013 (5) TMI 738 - AT
  71. 2013 (6) TMI 390 - AT
  72. 2013 (6) TMI 167 - AT
  73. 2012 (12) TMI 930 - AT
  74. 2012 (11) TMI 1005 - AT
  75. 2014 (6) TMI 679 - AT
  76. 2013 (3) TMI 347 - AT
  77. 2012 (7) TMI 670 - AT
  78. 2012 (6) TMI 121 - AT
  79. 2012 (10) TMI 877 - AT
  80. 2012 (3) TMI 403 - AT
  81. 2012 (7) TMI 564 - AT
  82. 2012 (4) TMI 274 - AT
  83. 2011 (12) TMI 537 - AT
  84. 2014 (3) TMI 510 - AT
  85. 2012 (11) TMI 520 - AT
  86. 2012 (10) TMI 78 - AT
  87. 2011 (11) TMI 264 - AT
  88. 2011 (10) TMI 540 - AT
  89. 2011 (10) TMI 695 - AT
  90. 2013 (9) TMI 312 - AT
  91. 2011 (9) TMI 293 - AT
  92. 2012 (10) TMI 108 - AT
  93. 2011 (8) TMI 145 - AT
  94. 2011 (8) TMI 547 - AT
  95. 2011 (7) TMI 736 - AT
  96. 2011 (7) TMI 939 - AT
  97. 2011 (6) TMI 406 - AT
  98. 2012 (5) TMI 444 - AT
  99. 2011 (4) TMI 332 - AT
  100. 2011 (4) TMI 1111 - AT
  101. 2011 (3) TMI 640 - AT
  102. 2011 (2) TMI 573 - AT
  103. 2011 (2) TMI 419 - AT
  104. 2011 (2) TMI 21 - AT
  105. 2011 (2) TMI 466 - AT
  106. 2011 (3) TMI 647 - AT
  107. 2011 (2) TMI 1169 - AT
  108. 2010 (11) TMI 831 - AT
  109. 2010 (11) TMI 901 - AT
  110. 2010 (10) TMI 281 - AT
  111. 2010 (8) TMI 190 - AT
  112. 2010 (8) TMI 198 - AT
  113. 2010 (7) TMI 999 - AT
  114. 2010 (6) TMI 696 - AT
  115. 2010 (6) TMI 413 - AT
  116. 2010 (6) TMI 409 - AT
  117. 2010 (3) TMI 507 - AT
  118. 2010 (2) TMI 1039 - AT
  119. 2010 (2) TMI 341 - AT
  120. 2010 (2) TMI 606 - AT
  121. 2009 (12) TMI 814 - AT
  122. 2009 (8) TMI 991 - AT
  123. 2009 (7) TMI 1038 - AT
  124. 2009 (7) TMI 1136 - AT
  125. 2009 (7) TMI 956 - AT
  126. 2009 (6) TMI 64 - AT
  127. 2009 (6) TMI 271 - AT
  128. 2009 (5) TMI 741 - AT
  129. 2009 (3) TMI 431 - AT
  130. 2009 (1) TMI 589 - AT
  131. 2009 (1) TMI 194 - AT
  132. 2008 (10) TMI 234 - AT
  133. 2008 (9) TMI 302 - AT
  134. 2008 (9) TMI 728 - AT
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding the imposition of penalty.
2. Correctness of the penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner and subsequent authorities.
3. Applicability of the first proviso to Section 11AC in the case.
4. Adjudication of the penalty amount and the Assessee's obligation to pay within 30 days.
5. Judicial review of penalty imposition and entitlement to benefit under the Act.

The High Court analyzed the case concerning the imposition of a penalty on the Assessee under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court framed the substantial question of law regarding the correctness of upholding a 100% penalty on the Assessee by the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The case involved the interception of goods, admission of wrongdoing by an employee, and subsequent actions taken by the authorities. The Assistant Commissioner imposed a penalty of 100% of the duty amount under Section 11AC. The Assessee contended that as the duty was paid before the show cause notice, the penalty should not exceed 25% as per the first proviso to Section 11AC.

The Court observed that the purpose of Section 11AC and its provisos was to provide a benefit to the Assessee if the duty demanded was paid within 30 days of the adjudication order. In this case, since the duty was paid before the notice, the Assessee should only be liable for 25% of the duty amount as a penalty. The Court noted that the Assistant Commissioner incorrectly demanded 100% penalty, contrary to the statutory entitlement of the Assessee under the first proviso to Section 11AC.

The Court held that the Assessee challenging the incorrect penalty imposition was justified, as the authorities acted illegally and contrary to the law. The failure to pay the penalty within 30 days could not be held against the Assessee in this circumstance. The Court ruled in favor of the Assessee, directing the Assessee to make the balance payment within a specified period. The judgment emphasized the importance of explicitly stating the options available to the Assessee under Section 11AC in adjudication orders to avoid similar issues in the future.

The Court's decision highlighted the need for clarity in penalty imposition and the obligation of the authorities to adhere to statutory provisions. The judgment provided a comprehensive analysis of the legal provisions, the Assessee's rights, and the correct application of penalties under the Central Excise Act, ensuring a fair and just outcome in the case.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates