Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (5) TMI 465 - CESTAT, BANGALOREPayment of duty-Penalty-Interest- the Asst. Commissioner has debarred the appellants under Rule 8(4) (ii) of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 from deferred payment facility vide his letter dated 8-2-2002 issued in C.No. IV/11/2003/STAT/2000/592 consequent to the third default in duty payment in the financial year 2001-02 by the appellants. Commissioner (Appeals) confirm the duty and imposed penalty. In the light of the various decisions held that- the duty amount paid by the appellant in RG23A Part-II has to be considered as discharged duty liability. Coming to the invoking the provisions of interest, we find that the interest is payable as appellant has not discharged the duty liability within time. We uphold the order of the lower authorities to the extent the interest liability has been confirmed. As regards imposition of penalty, we find that the Adjudicating authority has imposed equal penalty under the provisions of Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We find that the violation of the law in this case by the appellant is only to the extent that he has not followed the directions of the Adjudicating authority to pay the duty in PLA consignment wise. This cannot be equated with the stringent provisions of Section 11AC for the purpose of imposing equal penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that a token penalty of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) would suffice to meet the ends of justice.
|