TMI Blog2001 (12) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... falling under Chapter 52, 54 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Central Government introduced a scheme enacting Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, to levy Excise duty on production capacity of the industry. 3.Exercising powers conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 3A read with Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Central Government made certain amendments to the Central Excise Rules, 1944. While doing such exercise, the Central Government inserted Rule 96ZQ under which the liability of the independent processor of textile fabrics to pay interest and penalty if the amount of duty on the specified date is paid. Under sub-rule (5) to Rule 96ZQ it is stated as follows : - If an independent processor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax whenever the provisions of Section 7(5) are attracted. Depending upon the facts of each case the assessing authority has to decide as to what would be the reasonable amount of penalty to be imposed, the maximum being ten times the amount of the entry tax. So construed, sub-section (5) of Section 7 cannot be regarded as confiscatory. Consequently, this also cannot be a ground for holding Section 7(5) to be ultra vires. From the aforesaid it follows that Section 7(5) has to be13. construed to mean that the presumption contained therein is rebuttable and secondly the penalty of ten times the amount of entry tax stipulated therein is only the maximum amount which could be levied and the assessing authority has the discretion to levy lesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ily have gone, was not able to utilize it for public purposes. When appellants had the advantage of keeping the amount of tax without paying it to the State exchequer only because the High Court granted orders restraining the State from recovering that amount from the assessee, no act of the Court shall cause prejudice to any party. The prestine doctrine couched in the maxim, 'actus curiae reminem gravabit' has ever remained a salutary and guiding principle." So the challenge of the petitioners regarding the levy of interest at 36% under the impugned Rule cannot be sustained. 8.But, as held by the Apex Court in 1998 (99) E.L.T. 33 (supra), the penalty mentioned in the abovesaid Rule should be taken as only the maximum amount which would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
