2013 (10) TMI 846 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal orders Rs. 2,00,000 pre-deposit, stays penalty recovery pending appeal

M/s. Jayshree Vyapar Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST. Rajkot

The Tribunal ordered the appellant to pre-deposit Rs. 2,00,000/- within eight weeks and stay the recovery of the remaining penalty amounts pending appeal ... CENVAT Credit – Waiver of Pre-deposit - Revenue imposed penalties on the ground that the main appellant issued invoices for facilitating availment of ineligible cenvat credit – Held that:- Shri Shashikant Koticha has given a categorical statement before the authorities that they were supplying Pet coke to various parties without invoices - The invoices which indicate such pet coke presumably, were given to persons who could avail cenvat credit - the legal submissions made by the learned counsel as there being no corroborative evidences, needs to be gone into detail which can be done only at the time of final disposal of appeals - assessee is directed to pre- deposit an amount of Rs. 2,00,000 – upon such submission rest of the duty to be allowed to be stayed till the disposal – Partial stay granted. Issues: Stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties and personal penalty imposed under Central Excise Rules, 2004.Analysis:1. The appellant filed four stay petitions seeking waiver of pre-deposit of penalties totaling Rs. 1,36,00,295/-, interest, and equal penalty amounts, along with a personal penalty of Rs. 5 Lakhs under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2004, imposed on the Director of the appellant Company.2. The penalties were imposed due to allegations that the appellant had issued invoices to facilitate the availment of ineligible cenvat credit.3. The appellant's counsel argued that the case was fabricated, emphasizing the lack of evidence proving the issuance of invoices for availing ineligible cenvat credit. Reference was made to the show cause notice, the order in original, and the statement of the Director of the appellant Company, Mr. Shashikant Koticha, who denied the allegations.4. The departmental representative supported the findings of the lower authorities.5. After considering the submissions and examining the records, it was noted that Mr. Shashikant Koticha admitted to supplying Pet coke without invoices, suggesting that the invoices in question were possibly provided to parties for cenvat credit. The Tribunal acknowledged the need for a detailed investigation into the legal contentions raised by the appellant's counsel but deferred it to the final disposal of appeals. The Tribunal ordered the appellant to pre-deposit Rs. 2,00,000/- within eight weeks and stay the recovery of the remaining amounts pending appeal disposal.6. The Tribunal also addressed the cancellation of the appellant's registration certificate by the adjudicating authority, stating that if the pre-deposit condition was met, the registration certificate would be restored until the appeals were resolved.