Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2020 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 277 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine Removal - Department alleged that the appellant had full knowledge regarding the manufacture of excisable goods in the factory premises and subsequent removal without following the due process of law and without payment of Central Excise Duty - Confiscation - Redemption Fine - Penalty - applicability of Section 11AC of Central Excise Act - HELD THAT:- The only element for the applicability thereof, no doubt, is mensrea that is the intent to avoid the tax liability either in full or in half. The above observation that appellant knew about his goods to be excisable not only this he was also aware about the concept of SSI exemptions but failed to prove that his entire stock is covered under said SSI exemption. The absence of Central Excise Registration in the given scenario is nothing but the intent of the appellant to avoid his tax liability - It has been settled that for imposition of penalty mensrea has to be there. Further, admittedly, appellant has paid the duty as was demanded vide the subsequent show-cause-notice. The prosecution of the said subsequent show-cause-notice met the fate of deemed conclusion on the payment of duty demanded therein by the appellant - I am not at all convinced with the argument that the said deemed conclusion is applicable to the impugned show-cause-notice. The present show-cause-notice is with respect to violation of mandatory duty to obtain the Central Excise Registration before manufacturing and clearing the excisable goods. The said show-cause-notice is about confiscating such goods which have been, clandestinely, removed on account of the said violation. The subject matter of said show-cause-notice is altogether different than the show-cause-notice demanding duty. Question of double jeopardy does not at all arise for cause of action of both SCNs to be different. No doubt duty demand cannot be made for the same goods after entire duty liability has been discharged. However, liability towards confiscation remains. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|