9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lready discharged as duties of central excise for the period from March 2011 to July 2011 by debit of CENVAT balance, in another manner under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest thereon under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944, besides imposition of penalty under rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, in notice dated 27th March 2012 was modified to accept the duty already so discharged subject to payment of interest arising therefrom till 28th May 2012 and imposition of penalty of Rs. 5000 under rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The reviewing authority was aggrieved that the assessee had not been subjected to the requirement of rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and that penalty had not been imposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate as 26th May 2012, the undischarged duty liability of February and March 2011. The proposal for substitution of manner of payment of duty is limited only to Rs. 2,47,05,672 for March 2011 to June 2011 implying that rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 had been complied with thereafter. We, thus, have recovery by resort to substitution imperative for clearances of March 2011 onwards till July 2011 which should actually have included liability for duties arising on clearances of February and March 2011 too. 4. The adjudicating authority was, at the time of adjudication on 22nd January 2013, conscious of due discharge of liabilities for January-March 2011, along with interest - of Rs. 10,15,599 on 26th May 2012 and 28th May 2012 - ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VAT Credit in para 21 and 22 of the Order-in-Original, did agree that there was a clear violation of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 by the assessee but still concluding that the amount of Rs.2,47,05,672/- stood corrected when defaulted amount alongwith interest has been paid on 28.05.2012. For the said inference, the Commissioner has relied solely on CESTAT's order No. A/545/2011-WZB/C-II(EB) dated 13-06-2011 in the case of Solar Chemferts Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE, Thane-I reported in 2012 (276) ELT 273 (Tri-Mumbai). 13. It is pertinent to mention that law, in the form of Acts and Rules, will always prevail over judgments. Therefore, overlooking the provisions of the law and abiding by a single judgment would certainly not be ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of such proposition in the appeal now before us. 6. Per contra, the grounds of appeal put forth the unheard of, and perverse, proposition that law, in the form of Act and Rules, will always prevail over judgements; apparently, these worthies are unaware that law comprises streams which include legislated statutes and judge-rendered opinions. They also seem to be in ignorance of interpretative function which vests exclusively in the judicial institutions. If that is the comprehension of law among enforcers of an enactment that is also the author of their being, it is a saddening to those who believe in rule of law. Indeed, Montesquieu, and several of those who followed, would surely be turning over in their graves at this patent disresp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
