9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading; that M/s. Metal Transport Carriers, Appellant No. 3 and M/s. Deepak Roadways, Appellant No. 4, are carrying on the business of transport. 2.2 He submitted that the penalties have been imposed on all the Appellants on the ground that the importer of inputs, M/s. Shobit Impex, who had obtained registration for the purpose of dealing in inputs, had been issuing the invoices without physically bringing and storing the goods at their registered premises; that the allegation against Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 is that without receiving the goods, they had passed on the Modvat credit by only issuing the invoices and Appellants Nos. 3 and 4 had handed over the blank G.R. Books to M/s. Shobit Impex, who had been using those G.Rs. for showing tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lment of credit of additional duty was facilitated, and covered only a situation where the buyers' availment of credit of excise duty was facilitated." The learned Advocate contended that as the Central Excise Rules did not provide for any penal action for wrongly passing on the credit of Additional Duty of Customs prior to 14-7-99, no penalty could be imposed. 3. He, further, submitted that the penalty has been imposed on Appellants Nos. 3 and 4 under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which are not attracted as the goods involved here are imported one and not excisable goods; that penalty under Rule 209A may be imposed where any person commits any of the acts or deals in excisable goods which he knows or believes are liable fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attracted as the goods were arranged from the local market. 5.1 We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The charge against M/s. Ruby Impex and Satish Metal Co. is that they have wrongly passed on Modvat Credit by issuing fake modvatable invoices in 1997 and 1998. The question involved in these appeals is whether penalty is imposable on these two Appellants under Rule 173Q(1)(bbb) of the Central Excise Rules. This clause (bbb) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 173Q, prior to its amendment by Notification No. 50/99-C.E. (N.T.) provided imposition of penalty on a registered dealer if he "enters wilfully any wrong or incorrect particulars in the invoice issued for the excisable goods dealt with by him with intent to facilitate the buyer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ex case, supra, that "this sub-rule as it stood during the period in dispute, did not cover a situation where the buyers' availment of credit of additional duty was facilitated and covered only a situation where the buyers' availment of credit of excise duty was facilitated. In view of this, the penalty imposed on both, Ruby Impex and Satish Metal Co. is set aside. 6. We also agree with the submissions of the learned Advocate that penalty cannot be imposed on Milap Transport Carriers and Deepak Roadways under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as none of the ingredients mentioned in the said Rule 209A is applicable. A penalty is imposable on any person, who acquires possession of, or is in any way concerned in transporting, remov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
