Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 897 - AT - Central ExcisePenalty - whether Rule 25 ibid read with Section 11AC ibid can be invoked in the circumstances of the present case for imposition of penalties against the appellants? Held that: - In this case, though the finished goods, at times, were removed by means of cycle rickshaws, auto rickshaws etc., but the invoices were issued at the end of the day, by furnishing the quantity and duty with regard to the goods actually removed from the factory - The only lacunae in this case was that the vehicle number in invoice was wrongly mentioned. The reason for issuance of a consolidated invoice on the end of the day was to avoid issuing several invoices in respect of each small quantity of the goods. The modus operandi adopted by the appellant cannot be termed as fraudulent in nature, with intention to defraud the government revenue - in absence of any suppression, fraud, collusion etc., with intention to evade payment of Central Excise duty, penalties cannot be imposed on the appellant. Under the identical situation and circumstances of the case, the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE & C Vs. Saurashtra Cement Ltd. [2010 (9) TMI 422 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. Penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|