Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 386 - AT - Central ExciseDelay in payment of excise duty - duty for March 2010 required to be paid by 31-3-2010 was finally paid on 18-5-2010 - assessee contested against penalty levy on non-mention of the specific clause of Rule 25(1) - Held that:- As during the forfeiture period the appellant did not pay the duty consignment wise and only through PLA, clearances would be treated having been made without payment of duty and hence the provisions Rule 25(1) would be attracted which provides for imposition of penalty for clearances of the goods in contravention of the provisions of the Rules. The judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court cited by the Appellant does not discuss the implication of the wordings of Rule 8(3A). As regards non-mention of the specific clause of Rule 25, on going through the show cause notice it is found that nature of contravention has been specifically mentioned. Therefore, non-mention of exact clause of sub-rule (1) of Rule 25 in the show cause notice would not vitiate the same. Therefore penalty has been correctly imposed under Rule 25. Taking into account the fact that default attracting the provisions of Rule 8(3A) was only for 17 days, the duty involved on the goods cleared during this period which was required to be paid consignment-wise, is only Rs. 1,07,067/- and this duty had been paid next month, penalty of Rs. 25,000/- for the clearances of the goods deemed to have been cleared without payment of duty is on much higher side, thus while imposition of penalty on the appellant under Rule 25(1) is upheld, the quantum of penalty is reduced to Rs. 5000/-.
|