9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4,36,887/- with interest and penalty of equal amount and personal penalty of Rs. One lakh is pending against them - The Hon ble Supreme Court in Macson Marbles has held that on transfer of industrial unit by the State Financial Institution, liability to pay excise dues of the previous owner gets transferred to the purchaser. Further, having given undertaking to the department at the time of registration appellant cannot go back and say that undertaking given by them is not binding on them - Thus, in terms of Section 11 and undertaking given by the appellant and in view of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, appellant are liable for the dues against M/s. Prince Paper Mills - As regards interest, the issue is covered by the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 173Q (1) should not be imposed in the absence of apportionment of the penalty. They also relied upon the following decisions :- (a) Agarwal Pharmaceuticals 2002 (50) RLT (CEGAT. DEL.) (b) Sweta Gupta vs. UOI 2006 (205) ELT 155 (Guj) (c) KK Kadri Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd 2009 (241) ELT 571 (Tri.Ahmd) 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise however did not agree with the contention and matter went to Commissioner (Appeal) for decision. Commissioner (Appeal) held that appeal against these two letters from the Revenue, dated 15.6.2010 and 17.6.2010, is not admissible under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, as these letters are neither decision nor an order issued under the provisions of Central Excise Act but are simple letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay : Thus, it is very clear that Tribunal can entertain appeal only if the appeal is made by aggrieved person against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeal) under Section 35A. On this ground alone the appeal filed by the appellant is liable to be rejected. Even, assuming that they have filed an appeal considering the letter communicating to them by the Revenue as decisions, it is seen that admittedly the appellants have given an indemnity bond against the liabilities before getting registration certificate. Therefore, the appellant is bound to pay all dues as per the conditions in the indemnity bond executed by them. It is also pertinent to note that while executing the indemnity bond, no objection was raised by the appellants. 4. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility of respondent No. 4 and held that respondent No. 4 is also liable to pay penalty in a sum of Rs. 3 Lakhs while the Excise dues liable would be in the order of a lakh or so. It is difficult to conceive that the appellant had any opportunity to participate in the adjudication proceedings and contend against the levy of the penalty. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we think it appropriate to direct that the said amount, if already paid, shall be refunded within a period of three months. In other respects, the order made by the High Court shall remain undisturbed. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. 6.In view of the above discussions, appellants are held liable to pay the interest amount demanded from them. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
