Case Law Details
Integral Coach Factory Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of railway coaches and are registered with the Central Excise Department. On specific intelligence that they were clearing railway coaches without payment of duty, the officers of the Preventive Unit visited the premises and verified the records. It was found that for the period 20.04.2011 to 31.12.2011, the appellant had not been paying Excise Duty on the finished goods cleared from their factory. Show cause notice was issued proposing to demand the duty along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand and appropriated the amount paid by the appellant. The original authority ordered for payment of appropriate interest and also imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal.
The contest in the appeal is confined only to the demand of interest and penalty of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the appellant. Ld. Counsel has explained that the appellant is a Central Government undertaking and had omitted to pay the excise duty only because they were under the bonafide belief that the goods cleared by them (railway coaches) are exempted from excise duty as per notification. They have paid the duty on 31.01.2012. The appeal is filed against the demand of interest. We do not find any ground to set aside the demand of interest. As rightly argued by Ld. A.R in the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay relied by Ld. Counsel for appellant the question is whether the demand under the SCN is barred by limitation or not. In the case on hand, the demand raised is within the normal period. Further, there is no penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner has considered all the facts and imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- only. On this score, we find no grounds to interfere with the demand of interest and imposition of penalty.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER
Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of railway coaches and are registered with the Central Excise Department. On specific intelligence that they were clearing railway coaches without payment of duty, the officers of the Preventive Unit visited the premises and verified the records. It was found that for the period 20.04.2011 to 31.12.2011, the appellant had not been paying Excise Duty on the finished goods cleared from their factory. Show cause notice was issued proposing to demand the duty along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand and appropriated the amount paid by the appellant. The original authority ordered for payment of appropriate interest and also imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
