2017 (1) TMI 923 - HC - Central Excise

Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error or law in giving option to the respondent to deposit duty, interest and @25% of duty amount towards penalty, within 30 days from the receipt of the order of the Tribunal for availing benefit of reduced penalty under proviso to section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944? Held that - the question/s involved in the present appeal is/are squarely covered against the revenue in light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Surat-I Versus M/s. Kanishka Prints Pvt. Ltd. 2011 (4) TMI 1444 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , where it was held that - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal erred in allowing the respondent to deposit duty, interest, and penalty for availing reduced penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944?
2. Whether the Tribunal erred in not comparing the facts of previous cases while giving the respondent the option of reduced penalty?
3. Whether the impugned Tribunal order was passed in accordance with the law?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision to allow the respondent to deposit duty, interest, and 25% of the duty amount towards penalty within 30 days to avail the benefit of reduced penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant argued that the Tribunal committed a substantial error in this regard. However, the advocate for the appellant conceded that the issue was settled against the revenue based on a previous decision of the Division Bench in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Surat-I Versus M/s. Kanishka Prints Pvt. Ltd. The Court agreed with this view and dismissed the appeal.

Issue 2:
The appellant contended that the Tribunal erred in applying decisions from previous cases without comparing the facts of those cases with the present case. Specifically, the appellant mentioned the cases of M/s. Swati Chemical Industries and M/s. Akash Fashion Prints Pvt. Ltd. The Court, after considering the arguments and the decision in the case of M/s. Kanishka Prints Pvt. Ltd., concluded that the questions raised in the appeal were settled against the revenue. The Court found no merit in the appellant's argument regarding the comparison of facts from previous cases and upheld the Tribunal's decision.

Issue 3:
Lastly, the appellant raised the issue of whether the impugned Tribunal order was passed in accordance with the law. After hearing the arguments and considering the decision in the case of M/s. Kanishka Prints Pvt. Ltd., the Court found that the questions raised in the appeal were conclusively settled against the revenue. Therefore, the Court held that the impugned order was in accordance with the law and dismissed the appeal based on the reasons stated in the decision of M/s. Kanishka Prints Pvt. Ltd.