2015 (3) TMI 1110 - AT - Central Excise

Levy of personal penalty under Rule 26 - M/s. Sadbhavana Enterprises paid the amount of duty in question along with interest and 25 per cent of duty as penalty within a period of 30 days of issuing of the show cause notice - Held that - if against a show cause notice the main party paid duty interest and 25 per cent duty as penalty then the proceedings initiated through the show cause notice comes to an end. - Since the main assessee has paid duty interest and 25 per cent duty as penalty within 30 days of the issuing of the show cause notice therefore proceedings against the appellants also comes to an end. - Decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against imposition of penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Imposition of Penalty
The appellant appealed against the penalty imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The main party, M/s. Sadbhavana Enterprises, paid the duty, interest, and 25% of the duty as penalty within 30 days of the show cause notice. The appellant argued that as per Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, if the main party settles the duty, interest, and penalty, proceedings against all parties should end. The appellant cited a CBEC circular and previous tribunal decisions to support this argument. The respondent contended that a separate show cause notice was issued to the appellant, and thus, Section 11A(2) provisos did not apply. The Tribunal analyzed the CBEC circular and the show cause notice, concluding that since M/s. Sadbhavana Enterprises settled the dues promptly, proceedings against the appellant should also cease.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 11A(2) Proviso
The Tribunal delved into the interpretation of Section 11A(2) provisos, particularly the meaning of "such person" and "other persons." It discussed a previous case, Anand Agrawal, and disagreed with its interpretation, stating that the words "other persons" should cover co-noticees facing allegations linked to the duty chargeable person. The Tribunal emphasized that when the main party settles the duty, interest, and penalty, there is no need to continue proceedings against other individuals involved in the transaction. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant based on this interpretation.

Conclusion
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalty imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The decision was based on the prompt settlement of dues by M/s. Sadbhavana Enterprises, which led to the conclusion that proceedings against the appellant should also end. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.