Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (10) TMI 529 - AT - Central ExcisePenalty under Rules 9(2), 173Q and 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Held that:- The Appellate Authority mechanically confirmed the adjudication order without looking the reason why a composite penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was imposable under three different Rules. Rule 9(2) operates on its own field in respect of certain offence listed therein. Rule 173Q has its own area of operation. Similarly Rule 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 is a distinct rule by the nature of default prescribed therein Different circumstances are prescribed by three different rules for levy of penalty. There is no composite provision apparent by reading of all the three distinct rules which were prevalent at the material time. In absence of any composite prescription of levy of penalty, reason also being absent for invoking the respective rule and whether ingredients of those rules were present not being brought out by the orders of authorities below, it is difficult to approve their action. Cogent evidence in respect of contravention of each such rule is also neither present nor spoken by the order. Therefore, the appellate order can only be said to be cryptic without being reasoned and self speaking. Such order does not stand to reason - Decided in favour of assessee.
|