2009 (7) TMI 1038 - AT - Central Excise

Penalty u/s 11AC of CEA, 1944 - quantum of - clandestine removal - entire duty was paid before issuance of SCN

Issues:
Quantum of penalty imposable under Section 11AC of CEA, 1944.

Analysis:
1. Appeal No. E/68/2004: The appeal was filed by the Revenue for enhancement of penalty imposed under Section 11AC, which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue.

2. Appeal No. E/2922/2004: The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demands but set aside the penalty under Section 11AC. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty.

3. Appeal No. E/3894/2005: The duty was confirmed, and the penalty was reduced by the Tribunal considering the duty was deposited before the show cause notice.

4. Appeal No. E/3997/2005: The duty demand was confirmed, and the penalty was reduced by the Tribunal from Rs. 79,278 to Rs. 50,000.

5. Appeal No. E/35/2006: The penalty was reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) and upheld by the Tribunal, considering the duty was paid before the show cause notice.

6. Appeal Nos. E/158, 159/2006: The penalties were reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) and further enhancement was rejected by the Tribunal.

7. Appeal No. E/161/2006: The Tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs. 75,000 considering the amount was deposited immediately by the assessee.

8. Appeal Nos. E/188, 2814/2006: The penalty was reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) and upheld by the Tribunal. A separate appeal for enhancement of penalty was also rejected.

9. Appeal No. E/253/2006: The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty, considering the duty was deposited before the show cause notice.

10. Appeal Nos. E/369, 2963/2006: The Tribunal imposed a penalty of 25% of the duty amount and rejected one of the appeals filed by the Revenue.

11. Appeal No. E/439/2006: The Tribunal reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty determined based on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

12. Appeal No. E/369/2007: The Tribunal reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty determined based on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

13. Appeal No. E/756/2007: The penalty was enhanced to 25% of the duty amount by the Tribunal based on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

14. Appeal No. E/1374/2006: The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty, upholding the reduction in the quantum of penalty.

15. Appeal No. E/959/2007: The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, reducing the penalty to 25% of the duty demand.

16. Appeal No. E/2313/2007: The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal for enhancement of penalty, considering the duty was deposited before the show cause notice.

17. Appeal Nos. E/265-266/2008: The penalties were reduced to 25% of the duty amount by the Tribunal based on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of M/s. Dharmendra Textile Processors was referred to, stating that authorities have no discretion to impose less penalty under Section 11AC. The penalties in all appeals were increased to 100% of the duties. The Provisos to Section 11AC were discussed, providing an option to deposit reduced penalties within thirty days. The Tribunal enhanced penalties but gave the option to deposit reduced penalties within thirty days. The penalties were enhanced to the duty confirmed, but the option to deposit reduced amounts within thirty days was provided, in accordance with the Provisos to Section 11AC and the judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts.

← Previous Next →