2010 (12) TMI 160 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal remands penalty imposition case to High Court for rule validity determination.

CCE Surat & others Versus M/s. Bhavna Silk Mills P. Ltd. others

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad remanded the case regarding penalty imposition under Rule 96ZQ to the High Court for a decision on the vires of ... Penalty imposed under Rule 96ZQ (5) - The vires of Rule 96ZQ(5) are pending before the Court as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Para 27 of their judgment in the case of UOI vs. Dharmendra Textile Processor - Held that the consequence of the said judgment is that the challenge to vires to Rule 96ZQ(5) stands revived before the High Court - All the appeals are allowed by way of remand Issues involved:Imposition of penalty under Rule 96ZQAnalysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad addressed the issue of penalty imposition under Rule 96ZQ. The advocate for the appellants highlighted that the vires of Rule 96ZQ(5) were pending before the Court, as noted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a previous judgment. The Tribunal also acknowledged the Supreme Court's latest ruling in another case, which indicated that the challenge to the vires of Rule 96ZQ(5) was revived before the High Court. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the High Court for a decision on the vires of the rule.The Tribunal, considering that the penalty under Rule 96ZQ(5) was the sole issue in the appeal, set aside the impugned order and sent the case back to the Original Adjudicating Authority. The Authority was directed to determine the imposition and quantum of the penalty after the High Court's declaration on the challenge to the vires of Rule 96ZQ(5). It was clarified that the appellant could raise any additional issues before the adjudicating authorities. Ultimately, all the appeals were allowed through remand, awaiting the decision on the vires of the rule.