High CourtsDivision Bench(2014) 07 MAD CK 0150

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Ranga Balaji Cotton Mills

Madras High Court · Decided on 11 July 2014 · Citation: (2014) 47 GST 715

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. Sudhakar, J · G.M. Akbar Ali, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2972 of 2007

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 362 words

R. Sudhakar, J.—This civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the Final Order No. 480 of 2007 dated 04.05.2007 on the file of the CESTAT. This Court, by order dated, 06.12.2007 admitted this appeal on the following substantial question of law:

"Whether the Tribunal is right in setting aside the mandatory equal amount of penalty that was rightly imposed by the lower appellate forum under section 11AC on a proven ground that the respondents had clandestinely cleared excisable goods?"

On a perusal of the order of the Tribunal, it is seen that the issue raised in this appeal relates to levy of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. After dispensing with the pre-deposit, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal filed by the assessee at the admission stage itself by relying on the decision in 2003 (161) ELT 285, as affirmed by the Apex Court reported in 2004 (163) ELT A.53 (SC) on the ground that the duty was paid by the assessee prior to the issuance of show cause notice. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed the present appeal.

2.

The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India (UOI) Vs. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills, has clearly held that mere payment of differential duty whether before or after the show cause notice would not alter the situation and they would be liable for penalty in case the conditions for imposing such penalty spelt out in Section 11AC of the Act are attracted. In view of the categorical statement of law by the Supreme Court in the above-stated decision Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills (supra), the question of exonerating the assessee from payment of penalty does not arise. Hence, this appeal deserves to be allowed and the question of law has to be answered in favour of the Revenue and the question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue. However, the assessee will be entitled to any other benefit in terms of the proviso to Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed and the order of the Tribunal stands set aside. No costs.