2019 (10) TMI 1039 - HC - Central Excise

Permission for withdrawal of application - imposition of personal penalty on petitioner-Sh.Rajender Monga, authorised signatory of M/s Parle Biscuits Pvt.Ltd. - HELD THAT - The counsel has written instructions from the office of Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Rohtak vide letter dated 16.9.2019(P-1) to withdraw the present appeal as the penalty involved is ₹ 2 lacs only. The application is supported by an affidavit of the counsel for the petitioner. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the order passed by CESTAT remanding the matter back to jurisdictional Commissioner and setting aside personal penalty.
2. Determination of substantial question of law regarding recovery of duty demand and limitation period.
3. Application seeking withdrawal of the appeal based on revised monetary limit for filing appeals.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue under Sections 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order passed by CESTAT, remanding the matter back to the jurisdictional Commissioner and setting aside the personal penalty of ?2,00,000 on the petitioner, who was the authorized signatory of a company. The substantial question of law to be determined was whether the recovery of duty demand should be subject to the longer limitation period or the normal limitation period, considering the facts and circumstances of the case where details provided by the party were not disclosed for correct assessment.

2. An application was filed seeking to withdraw the appeal, citing the issuance of instructions by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs revising the monetary limit for filing appeals before the Court to ?1 crore. The application stated that the penalty involved in the case was only ?2 lakhs, and based on the instructions, the counsel had written instructions from the office of Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax to withdraw the appeal. The Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal based on the revised monetary limit for filing appeals.

3. The Court, in view of the application supported by an affidavit, allowed the withdrawal of the appeal and dismissed the case as withdrawn. The decision was made based on the revised monetary limit for filing appeals and the instructions received from the office of the Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax.