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

C.C.E., Delhi III, Gurgaon Versus Jumps auto Industries Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (9) TMI 128 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Imposition of penalty - Rule 25 & 26 of Central Excise Rules 2001 - appellants manufacturing excisable goods not registered with the department - clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty which were ultimately exported - Held that:- as 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

E COURT OF INDIA] and as observed by the authorities below that there was no intention to evade payment of duty on the part of the respondent, the provisions of Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2001 are not invokable and as such the penalties are not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Swati Gupta, Advocate for the respondent ORDER Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein penalties imposed on the respondent have been dropped by the Id. Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents are eng .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

red the excisable goods to the tune of ₹ 5,28,50,227/- without payment of duty and the goods were ultimately exported by M/s Jumps (India) Impex. In this background, a show cause notice was issued proposing demand of duty from the respondent an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lakhs was imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules 2001 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2001 on Shri Sanjay Malhotra, Managing Director of the party. Before Commissioner (Appeals) penalties on both the respondents have been dropped. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

espondent. The same view has been taken by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, in the absence of any mala fide intention of the respondent, provisions of rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 are not invokable. Consequently, no penalty is impo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xamined the issue and observed as under : 17. It is also to be borne in mind that Rule 25 starts with the word Subject to the provisions of Section 11AC............ . Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act deals with penalty for short levy or no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ontravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the Rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty, the person who is liable to pay duty as determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11AC, shall also be liable to pay a penalty eq .....

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
 
 


|| 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