Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the penalty imposed on the partner of the assessee could be sustained when the assessee firm had paid the duty, interest and reduced penalty under Section 11AC and the partner's own role was said to be attributable from the record.
Analysis: The assessee had accepted the duty liability and exercised the option to pay 25% of the penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The challenge in the appeal was confined to the separate penalty imposed on the partner. The Tribunal noted the authorities relied upon by the appellant holding that a separate penalty on a partner is not warranted where no specific role is attributed in the show-cause notice. On the facts, however, the show-cause notice recorded that the broker used to contact the partner and place orders for supply of materials, and this statement was not retracted. The Tribunal held that this showed the partner's involvement and distinguished the cited decisions.
Conclusion: The separate penalty on the partner was sustained and the appeal was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the record specifically attributes involvement to a partner in the clandestine clearances, a separate penalty on the partner is sustainable even if the firm has discharged the duty and reduced penalty under Section 11AC.