TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a in various judgments cited above, no duty and penalty can be imposed as observed in the case of Shreeji Surface Coatings P. Ltd. (2014 (12) TMI 656 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ). Since the rule under which the entire proceedings have been initiated have been declared unconstitutional, no liability arises under the said Rules. Therefore, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, Madras and Punjab & Haryana, set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal of the appellant with consequential relief, if any. - Appeal No. E/175/11- Mum - A/85458/16/SMB - Dated:- 27-1-2016 - MR. S.S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri T.C. Nair, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri S.V. Nair, AC(AR) OR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Authority confirmed the demand along with interest and penalty. Thereafter the appellant filed the appeal before the Commissioner who upheld the Order-in-Original. 3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is contrary to the law, justice, equity and is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 which require payment of duty only through account current and prohibits payment of duty through Cenvat account have been struck down as unconstitutional by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, Madras and Punjab Haryana by the following judgments: a) Indsur Global Ltd. -2014 (310) ELT 833 (Guj) b) Shreeji Surface Coa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther submitted that in view of the law down by various High Courts, imposition of penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Act, 2002 is totally unsustainable in law. He further submitted that the Tribunal in the following decisions has laid down that for the contravention of said rule 8 no penalty can be imposed under Rule 25 and only a penalty of ₹ 5000/- can be imposed under Rule 27. He cited the following authorities on this point:- * Saurashtra Cement Ltd. - 2008 (225) ELT 395 * Praveen Foundry P. Ltd. - 2009 (247) ELT 320 * Creative Transformers P. Ltd. - 2009 (248) ELT 855 * Tejpal Paper Mills Ltd. - 2010 (259) ELT 79. 6. He further submitted that since now the Rule 8(3A) itself has been struck down by var ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
