Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (5) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2015 (5) TMI 199 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
- Central Excise duty demand on clandestinely cleared goods
- Imposition of penalty and interest
- Confiscation of goods
- Penalty on partner under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules 1944

Central Excise Duty Demand:
The appellants were involved in manufacturing Polyester Texturised Yarn and were found with a shortage of finished goods during a visit by Central Excise officers. A show cause notice was issued proposing a demand of Central Excise duty on the clandestinely cleared yarn. The adjudicating authority confirmed the duty demand, interest, and imposed penalties along with confiscation of goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal.

Imposition of Penalty and Interest:
The appellant contended that they had paid the entire duty amount, interest, and 25% penalty within 30 days of receiving the adjudication order. As per Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act 1944, the penalty amount is 25% of the determined duty. The appellants argued for a waiver of the balance penalty amount. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument and modified the penalty accordingly.

Confiscation of Goods:
The appellants argued that since the goods were not physically available, the confiscation of goods was not sustainable. They referred to a Tribunal decision supporting their stance. The Tribunal agreed that confiscation and imposition of redemption fine were not justified in the absence of physical goods.

Penalty on Partner under Rule 209A:
The learned Authorised Representative raised objections to the penalty imposed on the partner-cum-authorised signatory of the appellant. The Tribunal noted that penalty was already imposed on the partnership firm under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act 1944, making the additional penalty on the partner under Rule 209A unjustified. Citing a decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal set aside the penalty on the partner, aligning with the legal precedent.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeals by modifying the penalty on the appellants, setting aside the confiscation and redemption fine, and nullifying the penalty on the partner. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the issues involved, considering legal provisions and precedents to deliver a fair decision.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates