2009 (1) TMI 106 - HC - Central Excise

Two questions were raised by the appellant-revenue challenging an order of the CESTAT before the HC at the time of hearing revenue requested the HC for deletion of first question and substitution of second question HC accepted the request and disposed off the appeal.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal - Justification for confiscation of goods - Reduction of penalty under Rule 25(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Error in setting aside penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules 2002.

Analysis:
The appellant-Revenue challenged the order dated 09-07-2007 made by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, proposing two questions for consideration. The first question pertained to the justification for confiscation of goods, whether finished goods or raw material, based on the grounds that they were not entered in the RG1 Register despite being in private records. The second question raised was regarding the reduction of penalty under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, despite the assessee admitting that the goods were not entered in the statutory RG1 register.

During the hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant sought permission to delete the first proposed question related to the Production Engineer of M/s. Resham Petrotech Ltd., for whom the order of confiscation had been issued. The second question was substituted with a query on whether the Tribunal erred in setting aside the penalty levied under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2002, despite the admission by the assessee regarding the non-entry of goods in the statutory RG1 register. The permission was granted to make this substitution, and the appeal proceeded based on this revised question alone.

The learned counsel addressed the court on this appeal along with another case concerning a manufacturing unit, as the facts were common, and the Tribunal's order was consolidated. The court, after considering the reasons recorded in the order of a related case, Tax Appeal No.342 of 2008, dismissed this appeal due to the absence of any substantial question of law. The decision was based on the findings and arguments presented, leading to the dismissal of the appeal challenging the Tribunal's order.

In conclusion, the High Court of Gujarat dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-Revenue against the order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The issues of justification for confiscation of goods and the reduction of penalty under the Central Excise Rules were thoroughly examined during the proceedings. The court's decision was based on the absence of any substantial legal question warranting a different outcome, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.