Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2010 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 994 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTPenalty on the Director - Tribunal set aside penalty levy - Held that:- Respondent is the active Director who is looking after the day to day working of the Unit and has admitted in his statements that the goods were cleared illicitly without payment of duty and was knowingly involved in the evasion of central excise duty. The Tribunal has merely recorded that it does not find any justifiable reason to impose the penalty upon the Director. While holding so, what has weighed upon the Tribunal is that no provision, section or rule of law under which the penalty has been imposed upon the Director, has been specified in the impugned order of the Joint Commissioner. These observations of the Tribunal overlook the fact that in the body of the Order in-Original, and more specifically in paragraph 23 thereof, the Adjudicating Authority has in fact, while considering the case against the respondent, held that the respondent is liable to penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. In the circumstances, merely because there is no mention of Rule 26 in the operative part of the order, it cannot be understood to mean that the adjudicating authority has not specified the provisions under which the penalty has been imposed upon the Director. It is settled legal position that an order has to be read as a whole. When the order made by the Adjudicating Authority is read as a whole, it becomes apparent that the penalty has been imposed on the respondent under Rule 26 of the Rules.Against assessee.
|