9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2001 (8) TMI 554 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
- Duty demand confirmation and penalty imposition on the company and its manager - Contestation of penalty imposition by the company - Contestation of penalty imposition by the manager Analysis: Issue 1: Duty demand confirmation and penalty imposition on the company and its manager The judgment involves two appeals against a common order confirming duty demand and imposing penalties on the company and its manager. The company was engaged in manufacturing motor cycles and parts, found removing components without payment of duty or reversal of Modvat credit. The duty demand and penalties were confirmed by the Commissioner, leading to appeals challenging these decisions. Issue 2: Contestation of penalty imposition by the company The company did not dispute the duty demand but contested the penalty imposition as excessive, especially after depositing the duty amount with interest. The company's counsel argued that the penalties under various rules were unwarranted, requesting a reduction in the penalty amount. The company sought the setting aside of a specific penalty amount and reduction in the overall penalty imposed. Issue 3: Contestation of penalty imposition by the manager The manager, appellant no. 2, also contested the penalty imposed, claiming limited involvement in the company's affairs and requesting leniency. The manager's counsel argued for setting aside the penalty, emphasizing the manager's subordinate role and lack of comprehensive knowledge of excise laws. The judgment considered the manager's involvement in the illegal activities and decided to reduce the penalty amount from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 15,000, acknowledging some concession due to his employment status. The judgment modified the penalties imposed on both the company and the manager, reducing the company's penalty amount from Rs. 24,45,187 to Rs. 15 lacs and setting aside a specific penalty under Rule 173Q. The manager's penalty was reduced from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 15,000. The duty demand and interest were upheld, while the penalties were adjusted based on the circumstances of the case. The appeals were partly allowed with consequential relief as permissible under the law.
|
