2016 (11) TMI 916 - AT - Central Excise

Imposition of penalty u/r 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - excess duty has been passed on manufacturer/buyer to avail excess Cenvat credit - Held that - The appellant has passed the Cenvat credit of the duty which they have paid to the manufacturer supplier and the appellant was under bona fide belief, that whatever duty, they have paid is the correct duty. In that circumstances, penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is not imposable to the appellant, therefore, I set aside the impugned imposition of penalty on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal against the imposition of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant, in this case, was alleged to have passed excess Cenvat credit to the manufacturer/buyer. The appellant had transferred duty paid to the manufacturer/supplier, unaware of any excess transfer of duty by the manufacturer/supplier. The appellant argued that they believed the duty paid was correct and thus, the penalty should not be imposed. The appellate tribunal considered the submissions and found that the penalty under Rule 26 was not imposable on the appellant. Therefore, the tribunal set aside the imposition of the penalty on the appellant. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside with any consequential relief.

This judgment highlights the importance of bona fide belief in determining the imposition of penalties under the Central Excise Rules. It emphasizes that if an entity passes duty paid to the manufacturer/supplier in good faith and without knowledge of any excess transfer, the penalty under Rule 26 may not be applicable. The decision underscores the need for a genuine belief in the correctness of duty payments to avoid penalties under the Central Excise Rules.