Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 953 - AT - Central ExciseImposition of personal penalty u/r 26 - The Revenue contested the impugned order on the ground that the facility of closure of proceedings as contemplated in Section 11A (2) is not applicable for the proceedings for confiscation of finished goods/raw material u/r 25 and also for imposition of penalty u/r 26 - Held that: - Admittedly, the case against the respondent is with reference to the duty demand and improper accounting. There is a single notice for both the parties (manufacturing unit and the Director). The proceedings are common and the matter is same. The interpretation of Revenue that the proceedings under Rule 25 and Rule 26 will continue to hold good, even after payment of full duty liability alongwith interest and 25% of penalty, is against the provisions of Section 11A (2). In Raman Gandhi vs. CCE, Delhi [2015 (3) TMI 1110 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], the Tribunal concluded that if against a show cause notice the main party paid duty, interest and 25% duty as penalty, then the proceedings initiated through the show cause notice comes to an end. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|