9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - the case is returned back to the referral Bench for a decision on merits - matter on remand. - Excise Appeal No.953 of 2012-(LB) - IO/E/32/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 3-4-2017 - Shri Dr. Satish Chandra, President, Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri J.P. Kaushik, Advocate - for the appellant. Shri Yogesh Agarwal, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. Per. B. Ravichandran The Division Bench, Chandigarh vide interim order No.18/2016 dated 06/12/2016 referred the present dispute to a Larger Bench for resolution. 2. The brief facts of the case are that during the period 01/09/2013 to 31/03/2006, the appellants were selling their excisable goods from their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on M/s Havells India Ltd. can be imposed in the facts and circumstances of the case as M/s Havells India Ltd. has not defaulted any payment of duty. In the circumstances, relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Marcandy Prasad Radhakrishna Prasad Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it was observed as under :- 5.3 Question would, however, remain whether the appellants would be liable to penalty under Rule 173Q. The adjudicating authority has not at all discussed the pleas regarding the previous management and the present management is not at all concerned. In the absence of any finding by the adjudicating authority, no case for penalty is made out under Rule 173Q readwith any other rule of the Central Excise Rules . 8. Ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Division Bench. First of all, we note that there is no contrary decisions by different benches of the Tribunal on the same issue. In Madhoprasad Mahabirprasad (Supplies) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE reported in 1989 (44) 361 (Tribunal), the Tribunal observed that as to the argument that the present appellants had no hand in the management of the firm at the relevant period, we have only to observe that the penalty is on the firm and hence the question as to whether the persons who are incharge of the firm now were incharge at the relevant period is not very relevant. In the circumstances while we are of the opinion that the order may require to be modified with reference to quantum of penalty, we are unable to indicate the extent by whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n) shall stand dissolved without winding up, once the scheme comes into effect. As such, it is clear that M/s Standard Electricals Ltd. as a juristic person/legal entity stood dissolved, upon the scheme approved by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court coming into effect. The dissolution of the company puts an end to the existence of the company. We note that the Central Excise duty liability is linked to the goods manufactured and cleared. The penalty is on person - juristic or natural. 7. Considering the above discussion and analysis, we note that there is no contrary decision of the coordinate benches on the issue referred by the Chandigarh Bench. As such, the case is returned back to the referral Bench for a decision on merits regarding i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
