9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed on M/s. Murugan Textiles to Rs. 1,25,000/-. M/s. Murugan Textiles had admittedly manipulated the invoices and evaded payment of duty to the extent of Rs. 4,17,000/- The duty due along with interest had been paid by M/s. Murugan Textiles before issue of Show Cause Notice. The original authority demanded the duty along with interest and imposed equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. 3. The assessee has filed the appeal praying for vacating the penalty in terms of the impugned order. The Revenue seeks restoration of the equal amount of penalty reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the same order. 4. The assessee has taken the ground that there was enormous confusion in the textile industry when exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder taking the same view having been dismissed by Apex Court, and no other view contrary to it has been brought to our notice, we do not find any reason to take a different view. 6. Ld. SDR submits that in appropriate cases warranting penalty under Section 11AC imposition of equal amount of penalty was legal and proper. In the subject case of admitted evasion of duty by the assessee by manipulating clearance documents, imposition of equal amount of penalty was warranted and justified. Therefore the impugned order modifying the penalty from Rs. 4,17,000/- to Rs. 1,25,000/- was not proper and equal amount of penalty imposed by the original authority had to be restored. He also cited the following case law. (i) Sony India Limited v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 11AC. There is also no consensus among the various High Courts as to whether penalty under Section 11AC need to be imposed if the assessee deposits the amount of duty before issue of the Show Cause Notice. 8.1 In Union of India v. T.P.L. Industries Ltd. (supra) [2007 (214) E.L.T. 506 (Raj.)] the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan decided that penalty need not be imposed under Section 11AC if the duty due was paid before issue of the Show Cause Notice. In arriving at the above decision, the Hon ble High Court had followed the ratio of judgments of three different High Courts and a judgment of the Apex Court. In CCE v. Ilpea Paramount Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Larger Bench of this Tribunal, following the directions of the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he textile trade was yet to get familiar with the Central Excise formalities during the material period. It is likely that some assessees found the competition difficult when the Central Excise levy also became part of the price of their goods. As pointed out by the assessee in the appeal, department had issued Press Note instructing departmental officers to condone procedural lapse by the textile manufacturers. The appeal has reproduced the following sentence from the circular :- The initial hesitation towards the new excise duty structure was primarily because of lack of knowledge about the facilitation measures being undertaken by the department. The confusion that prevailed in the textile industry in the wake of introduction of Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
