Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2014 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 778 - HC - Central ExcisePenalty u/s 11AC - Suppression of facts - Intention for evasion of duty - whether the Tribunal is justified in reducing the imposition of penalty - Held that:- There was wilful suppression of facts and fraud committed by the assessee with an intention to evade payment of duty as recorded by the Original Authority as well as the First Appellate Authority was confirmed by the Tribunal and the assessee has not preferred any appeal as regards this finding before this Court. The question therefore is once the ingredients required for applying Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was made out, whether the Tribunal is justified in reducing the imposition of penalty which was imposed equivalent to that of differential duty. once Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act is applicable, there is no justification in quantifying the amount and the penalty imposed must be equivalent to the differential duty re-determined under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Referring to the decision in the case of Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors reported in [2008 (9) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT], the Supreme Court pointed out that “though the application of Section 11AC would depend upon the existence or otherwise of the conditions expressly stated in the section, once the section is applicable in a case the authority concerned would have no discretion in quantifying the amount and penalty must be imposed equal to the duty determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11A. - Decided in favour of revenue.
|