Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 709 - HC - Central ExciseDemand of Central Excise duty short paid - section 11A of the Central Excise Act 1944 read with Rule 96 ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules 1944 - hether the omission of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by Section 121 of the Finance Act, 2001 without any savings clause would affect proceedings in respect of which action had already been initiated? Held that:- The issue is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mill ruling mainly [2015 (11) TMI 1172 - SUPREME COURT] by relying upon its earlier judgment in the case of M/s Fibre Boards(P) Ltd., Bangalore Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore,[2015 (8) TMI 482 - SUPREME COURT] has held that omission of Section 3A of the said Act by Section 131 of the Finance Act, 2001, without any saving clause would not affect the proceedings in respect of which action has already been initiated - Hon'ble Apex court held that “omission” would amount to a “repeal” for the purpose of General Clauses Act, 1897 and, therefore, even after omission Section 3A of the said Act w.e.f. 11.5.2001, pending proceedings would remain unaffected. In terms of the ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mill demand or levy in excess of ₹ 5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) would amount to demand or levy, otherwise than under the authority of law. Therefore, there would be no point in allowing Excise Appeal - appeals disposed off.
|