9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 977X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of taxable service, on which they had discharged the service tax liability. Payment of service tax proves the bonafides of the appellant that they had no intention to evade payment of central excise duty and accordingly, upon detection of mistake that job work activity will not be consider as service and will fall under the purview of manufacture, the appellant appropriately discharged the central excise duty liability alongwith interest. There is no element of suppression, wilful misstatement, fraud etc. involved in the present case, justifying invocation of the extended period of limitation for issuance of the show cause notice and for adjudication of the proceedings, especially for the purpose of imposition of mandatory penalty. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moving the tractors parts to M/s. TAFE Motors Tractors Ltd., the appellant did not collect the central excise duty attributable to the removal of tractor parts. However, subsequently, central excise duty attributable to the removal of tractor parts for the disputed period alongwith interest was paid by the appellant. So far as leviability of Central Excise duty on job worked goods is concerned, the appellant is not contesting the same in this appeal. The appellants only grievance is with regard to imposition of penalties by the authorities below under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Hence, this present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal. 3. The ld. Consultant Shri A.K. Mishra appearing for the appellant submits t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ER-I return, it cannot be said that the facts intimated by the appellant in the ER-I Return were known to the Department beforehand. Thus, according to the ld. D.R., there was ample justification for invocation of the provisions of section 11AC of the Act for imposition of equal amount of penalty. 5. I have heard the ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. The short question involved in this appeal for determination by this Tribunal is, as to whether, the authorities below are justified in invoking the provisions of section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for imposition of equal amount of penalty, considering the facts involved in the present case. 6. I find from the available records that though, the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, I am of the considered opinion that there is no element of suppression, wilful misstatement, fraud etc. involved in the present case, justifying invocation of the extended period of limitation for issuance of the show cause notice and for adjudication of the proceedings, especially for the purpose of imposition of mandatory penalty. I am also of the view that since, the entire duty liability alongwith interest has been paid by the appellant before issue of show cause notice, the appellant should get the benefit of provisions of section 11A (2B) of the Central Excise Act 1944, according to which, there was no requirement of issuance of show cause notice, once the duty alongwith interest has been paid. Further, since the ingredients mentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
