2004 (2) TMI 84 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's judgment on penalty imposition under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a public sector undertaking, challenged the penalty of Rs. 13,90,86,359/- imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise under Section 11AC of the Act. The Tribunal set aside this penalty for the period before 28-9-1996, as Section 11AC was not in force then, following a Supreme Court decision.
2. The Tribunal upheld a penalty of Rs. 45,87,732/- for the subsequent period. The petitioner contended that the Tribunal erred in not considering the proportionality of the penalty vis-a-vis the duty payable post 28-9-1996 and in not examining the evasion of duty due to fraud or wilful misstatement.
3. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal should have considered whether the short levy was due to fraud or contravention of provisions with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal should have examined the petitioner's claim of no intent to evade payment of duty under Rule 57E of the Modvat Rules.
4. The High Court noted that the Tribunal failed to consider the petitioner's challenge to the penalty imposition fully. The Court emphasized the need for assessing mens rea and the bona fides of the assessee in duty liability disputes. The Court held that the Tribunal erred in not allowing the petitioner to present all contentions to show no intent to evade duty.
5. Consequently, the High Court quashed the Tribunal's judgment upholding the penalty of Rs. 45,87,732/- and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision. The Court clarified that the penalty of Rs. 13,90,86,359/- for the period before 28-9-1996 was correctly set aside by the Tribunal.