Tribunal dismisses Revenue's appeal, upholds decision to annul penalty under Central Excise Act.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal found that despite the shortage of raw materials involving central excise duty, the duty was promptly paid, reasons for the shortage were accepted, and there was no evidence of clandestine clearance of goods. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the decision to annul the penalty, citing the absence of elements required for penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The appeal was dismissed on 5-6-2009.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The case involved a situation where Central Excise Officers visited the respondent's factory and found a shortage of raw materials involving central excise duty. The Authorised Signatory explained that the shortage occurred during loading/unloading of drums. The respondent accepted the shortage, deposited the duty, and provided reasons for the shortage, which were not disputed by the department. The Original Authority confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty of an equal amount under Section 11AC. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty.

Upon review, the Tribunal found that the shortage was detected during stock verification, the duty was paid promptly, and the reasons for the shortage were accepted. Referring to a judgment by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, it was noted that the mere payment of duty before the issuance of a show cause notice does not preclude the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC, provided the elements of the section, including mens rea, are satisfied. However, in this case, there was no evidence of clandestine clearance of goods, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC was not warranted. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue.

The judgment was pronounced on 5-6-2009, and the appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal.

---