2018 (2) TMI 627 - AT - Central Excise

Penalty - malafide intention - time limitation - Held that - the demand is not time-barred - penalty was cancelled for the reason that the duty was paid along with the interest before issuing the SCN. By mis-interpreting the wordings or law, no benefit can be extended to the appellant - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Levy of penalty without mala fide intention
- Duty payment before show cause notice issuance
- Cancellation of penalty and demand of extended period

Levy of Penalty without Mala Fide Intention:
The appeal was against Order-in-Appeal No: PII/PAP/204/08, where the Commissioner (Appeals) cancelled the penalty levy due to the absence of mala fide intention on the part of the assessee. The appellant's counsel argued that since there was no mala fide intention, the demand should be considered time-barred. However, the representative for the respondent contended that the duty was paid with interest before the show cause notice was issued. Citing the case law Commissioner of Central Excise v. Gaurav Mercantiles Ltd, it was argued that the penalty levy was rightly cancelled.

Duty Payment before Show Cause Notice Issuance:
The Tribunal noted that the cancellation of penalty and the demand of the extended period were distinct issues requiring separate consideration. The original authority had discussed the extended period in detail, and the Commissioner (Appeals) also analyzed the issue independently, which was deemed reasonable by the Tribunal. It was concluded that the demand was not time-barred, and the penalty was cancelled due to the duty payment along with interest before the show cause notice. The Tribunal emphasized that misinterpreting the law or wordings cannot grant any benefit to the appellant.

Cancellation of Penalty and Demand of Extended Period:
After hearing both sides and reviewing the records, the Tribunal found that the appeal lacked merit. The Tribunal upheld the decision to dismiss the appeal, stating that the demand was not time-barred, and the penalty cancellation was justified based on the duty payment before the show cause notice issuance. The Tribunal emphasized that no benefit could be extended to the appellant by misinterpreting the law or wordings. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and the decision was pronounced in the open court.