9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (3) TMI 526 - HC - Central ExciseNon-speaking order - The respondent had preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals who by his order dated 15-12-2003 had reduced the penalty. Against the said order, the respondent filed an appeal before the CESTAT and the CESTAT by its order dated 4-7-2005 has allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue and has set aside the levy of penalty and interest on the ground that the respondent had paid the duty before issuance of the show cause notice. The said order is in challenge in this appeal. Penalty and interest set aside by Tribunal without assigning reason thereof. Held that - matter remaded to Tribunal to reconsider issue and pass frsh order.
Issues:
Challenge to order dated 4-7-2005 regarding penalty and interest levy on a 100% export-oriented unit for availing benefit under notifications dated 1-3-1997 and 2-6-1998. Analysis: The case involves a 100% export-oriented unit engaged in cotton yarn manufacturing, availing exemptions for Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) clearances. The Revenue alleged suppression of facts related to the origin of cotton used for manufacturing. Consequently, a show cause notice was issued, leading to penalty proceedings under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Order-in-Original levied penalty under Section 11A of the Act, which was reduced by the Commissioner of Appeals. Subsequently, the CESTAT allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the penalty and interest levy due to the duty payment before the show cause notice. However, the High Court noted the absence of reasons in the Tribunal's order for setting aside the penalty and interest. The Court found the Tribunal's decision vague, lacking references to relevant legal provisions or precedents. Therefore, the High Court remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for a reconsideration based on applicable laws and court judgments to determine if the assessee is entitled to waiver of penalty and interest. In conclusion, the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Tribunal to review the issue considering relevant legal provisions and court decisions within six months from the date of the High Court's order.
|
