Commissioner of Central Excise, Agra vs Aman Gupta

This appeal has been filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 20 October, 2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ''Tribunal'') [2015 (317) E.L.T. 777 (Tribunal)].

The substantial questions of law framed by the department are as follows :-

(1) Whether the benefit of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 1 March, 2003 under the facts and circumstances of the case can be extended to the party?

(2) Whether the benefit of exemption notifications can be extended to the party only on the basis of the forged documents prepared subsequently?

The respondent is a partner of M/s. Capstan Rubber (India) and for this reason penalty of Rs. one lac was imposed upon him under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. This was for the reason that the partner was responsible for controlling the day-to-day functioning of the unit and that he had failed to act with an intent to evade payment of duty. The Tribunal by order dated 15 February, 2013 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the central excise duty. Miscellaneous applications filed by the Department for recall of the order were also rejected by the Tribunal by order dated 20 October, 2014.

The order dated 20 October, 2014 was assailed by the Department in Central Excise Appeal Defective No. 133 of 2015 [Commissioner of Central Excise, Agra v. M/s. Capston Rubber (India)], which has been dismissed by us by order of date. Thus, no penalty could have been imposed upon a partner of M/s. Capston Rubber (India).

The appeal filed by the department is, accordingly, dismissed.