2017 (3) TMI 1145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ples of law that penal provisions need strict interpretation and a person could only be able to defend his case only when the particular provision under which he is proposed to be penalized, is mentioned in the notice itself - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Gunjan Shah, Chartered Accountant For the Respondent : Shri S. N. Gohil, Authorised Representative ORDER Per Dr. D. M. Misra These two appeals are filed against OIO No. 43/DEM/SURAT/2012 dated 29/03/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-SURAT-II. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants herein, namely, Shri D H Wadhwani, Dep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cannot absolve the appellants their liability of penalty. In support, he has referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J. K. Steel Ltd. Vs. Union of India 1978 (2) ELT J 355 (S. C.) and this Tribunal in the case of Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Vadodara-II 2014 (311) ELT 65 (Tri.-Ahmd.). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. The short point needs to be considered is: whether personal penalty on the appellants who were at the relevant time employees of company, is sustainable under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004. Before proceeding to consider the arguments advanced by both sides, it is necessary to refer to Rule 15 of CCR, 2004, which reads as under:- "15. Confisc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to a penalty which may extend to an amount not exceeding ten thousand rupees. (4) In a case, where (4) the CENVAT credit in respect of input services has been taken or utilized wrongly by reason of fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement, suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of the Finance Act or of the rules made thereunder with intention to evade payment of service tax, then, the provider of output service shall also be liable to pay penalty in terms of the provisions of section 78 of the Finance Act. (5) Any order under (5) sub-rule (1), sub-rule (2), sub-rule (3) or sub-rule (4) shall be issued by the Central Excise Officer following the principles of natural justice." 6. A plain reading of the said Rule .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X