Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad Versus Alexcon Extrusion Ltd.

2015 (10) TMI 2347 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Benefit of reduced penalty - whether the Commissioner after holding the respondents guilty of committing violations of exemption notifications could have imposed penalty lesser than that provided in 114A of the Customs Act and 11AC of the Central Excise Act - Held that:- period in dispute in this case pertains to November 1990 to February 1996. It is also not in dispute that the provisions of 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 and 11AC of the Excise Act, 1944 came into force with effect from 20/09/19 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

force. Both the penalty provisions are applicable prospectively and not retrospectively as held by the Tribunal in the case of Lakshi Packaging (P) Ltd. (1997 (4) TMI 216 - CEGAT, MADRAS). - there is no merit in the Revenue s appeal - Decided against Revenue. - APPEAL No.E/1031/05 - Dated:- 4-8-2015 - Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) And Mr. S.S. Garg, Member (Judicial) Shri.Hitesh Shah, Comm. (AR) : For the Petitioner Shri.G.B.Yadav, Advocate : For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS Garg 1. The pres .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-CE dated 04/01/95 by not fulfilling the export obligation. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s.Alexcon Extrusions Ltd., was granted letter of LI-EOB 107(89)/EO 223 (88) IL dated 08/06/1989 for setting up of a 100% EOU for manufacture of aluminium tube and tubings subject to fulfillment of certain conditions, viz., that the unit shall export its entire production for a period of 10 years or less from the date of commencement of commercial production as may be specified by the Government, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uties in terms of Notification No.13/81-Cus dated 09/02/81 and Notification No.123/81-CE dated 02/06/81 and1/95-Ce dated 04/01/95 for the purpose of in bond manufacture of aluminium tubes, etc. The assessee had imported duty free capital goods, raw materials and spares and consumables involving customs duty totalling to ₹ 6,32,01,419/- and similarly they had also procured duty free indigenous capital goods, raw materials, spares and consumables involving Central Excise duty totalling to &# .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2.1 The assessee in spite of notice did not appear before the Commissioner for personal hearing. The assessee vide their letter dated 31/01/2004 submitted that their company had suffered heavy financial losses and eventually closed down with effect from 01/04/96. The bankers of the assessee initiated legal proceedings against the company and finally obtained court decree in their favour and consequently the ban .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.13/81-CE dated 09/02/81, Excise duty amounting to ₹ 10,35,125/- in terms of Notification No.123/81-CE dated 02/06/81, Customs duty of ₹ 1,08,62,850/- in terms of Notification No.13/81-CE, Excise duty of ₹ 7,72,268/- in terms of Notification No.123/81-CE dated 02/06/81, Customs duty of ₹ 1,19,35,782/- in terms of Notification No.13/81-Customs dated 09/02/81 and Excise duty of ₹ 10,44,472/- in terms of Notification No.123/81-CE dated 02/06/81 & 1/95-CE dated 01/0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he breach of conditions of exemption notifications and thereby rendered themselves liable for penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 and for penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944, did not impose penalty equal to the duty determined as provided in the respective Act/Rules. In support of his submission, he relied upon the judgements in the case of CC (Exports), Chennai Vs. KRM International Ltd., reported in 2014 (309) ELT 456 (Mad) and the case of CC, Tuticorin Vs. Po .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Customs Act is mandatory in nature and the adjudicating authority has no discretion to reduce the same. 4. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the provisions of Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 & 11AC of Excise Act, 1944 providing mandatory penalty of equal amount cannot be invoked in this case as the said provision brought into statute book with effect from 20/09/1996 wherein the period in dispute in this case is from November 1990 to February 1996. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Brij Mohan Vs. CIT reported in 120 ITR-1. He further submitted that the penalty provisions of Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 and 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 are applicable prospectively and cannot be invoked retrospectively. 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the records. 5.1 The only point for consideration before us is whether the Commissioner after holding the respondents guilty of committing violations of exemption notifications could have imposed penalty lesser th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version