2018 (12) TMI 1579 - HC - Central Excise

Waiver of mandatory penalty imposable under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and/or Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - the issue of quantum of wrong availment of CENVAT credit and differential duty demandable is remanded for determination by the Adjudicating Authority - extended period of limitation - Held that - The letters produced by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant dated 17.8.2018 and 29.10.2018 are placed on record. This civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed as withdrawn and the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal are left open - liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against final order passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
2. Legality of waiving mandatory penalty under Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and/or Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944.
3. Withdrawal of appeal based on monetary policy circular by the Board.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to an appeal filed by the Revenue against a final order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26.2.2016. The appeal was admitted based on substantial questions of law regarding the legality of waiving the mandatory penalty under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and/or Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The questions raised were related to the remand for determination of wrong availment of CENVAT credit and differential duty demandable, as well as the interpretation of law and conduct of the respondent in the case.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant submitted a letter dated 29.10.2018 to the Registry seeking withdrawal of the appeal. This request was made in accordance with a letter dated 17.8.2018 received from the Deputy Commissioner (Legal), Salem, Office of the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Salem-1, instructing the appellant to withdraw the appeal based on the Board's monetary policy circular. It was mentioned that the monetary limit in the appeal was below the threshold set by the Board's circular dated 11.7.2018, leading to the instruction to withdraw the appeal. The letters dated 17.8.2018 and 29.10.2018 were produced by the appellant and placed on record.

3. Consequently, the civil miscellaneous appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, and the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal were left open. However, in case the tax effect exceeds the threshold limit specified in the circular under exceptional clauses, the Revenue was granted liberty to approach the Court to restore the appeal for hearing and decision on merits. The judgment also stated that no costs were to be awarded, and the connected CMP was also dismissed as a result of the withdrawal of the appeal.