Case Law Details
Additional Commissioner of Central Excise (Legal) Vs Kavveri Telecom Products Limited (Supreme Court)
Introduction: In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court addressed the quashing of prosecution under Sections 9 and 9-AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The impugned order had relied on a stay granted by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru (CESTAT) on tax and penalty recovery. This article delves into the Supreme Court’s decision and its implications.
Detailed Analysis: The impugned order, dated 10.01.2019, had quashed criminal prosecution against Kavveri Telecom Products Limited. The basis for the quashing was the CESTAT’s stay on tax and penalty recovery. However, the Supreme Court found that the appeal before the CESTAT was still pending and had not been adjudicated.
The CESTAT’s stay order required Kavveri Telecom Products Limited to make a pre-deposit of Rs.15 lakhs. Notably, the stay did not provide exoneration or findings on the merits of the criminal complaints. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court’s decision to quash prosecution solely based on the stay was incorrect.
As a result, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and reinstating criminal complaint C. C. No. 332 of 2011. The respondents were given the option to file applications for exemption from personal appearance and under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court requested CESTAT to expedite the appeal filed by the respondents.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
