9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2004 (10) TMI 112 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] has held that when the demand gets dropped on any account, penal provisions cannot survive against the assessee, and for the same reason, confiscation of the goods, which is penal nature, cannot be upheld. Similar views have been taken in various judicial pronouncements relied upon by the counsel for the appellant. Therefore, we are of the view that penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 cannot be imposed on the appellant for the alleged violation of Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/2630/2006-Mum - Final Order No. A/856/2013-WZB/C-II(EB) - Da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Notification issued under these Rules or does not account for any excisable goods produced or manufactured or stored by him or engages in the manufacture, production or storage of any excisable goods without having applied for registration certificate required under Section 6 of the Act or contravenes any of the provisions of these Rules or the Notifications issued under these Rules with intent to evade payment of duty. In the present case, the goods were received under Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 which has been formulated by exercising powers under Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Thus, in the present case, when the appellant has not violated any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessee has discharged duty liability correctly. If that is so, question of violating any provisions of law would not arise at all. 5.2 This Tribunal s Larger Bench in the case of Godrej Soaps v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai 2004 (174) E.L.T. 25 has held that when the demand gets dropped on any account, penal provisions cannot survive against the assessee, and for the same reason, confiscation of the goods, which is penal nature, cannot be upheld. Similar views have been taken in various judicial pronouncements relied upon by the counsel for the appellant. Therefore, we are of the view that penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 cannot be imposed on the appellant for the alleged violation of Central Exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
