TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal recalls order, reduces penalty, High Court remands for review</h1> <h3>HARYANA ACRYLIC MFG. CO. PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., NEW DELHI</h3> HARYANA ACRYLIC MFG. CO. PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., NEW DELHI - 2013 (294) E.L.T. 419 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Recalling of ex parte order due to absence of Senior Advocate.2. Confirmation of demand of duty and penalty against the company.3. Reconsideration of penalty amount based on Supreme Court judgment.4. Discretion of Tribunal in reducing penalty under Section 11AC.5. Applicability of 100% penalty under Section 11AC.Issue 1: Recalling of ex parte orderThe Tribunal considered the appellant's request to recall Order Nos. 765-767/2011-EX, which were passed ex parte due to the absence of the Senior Advocate. The Senior Advocate was delayed due to prior commitments before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Tribunal recalled the final order and proceeded to decide the issue.Issue 2: Confirmation of demand of duty and penaltyThe Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed a demand of duty and penalty against the company. The Tribunal confirmed the duty demand but reduced the penalty to Rs. 5 lakhs considering the case's overall circumstances. The High Court dismissed the reference application, leading to the confirmation of duty demand and penalty against the company.Issue 3: Reconsideration of penalty amountThe High Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the penalty amount based on the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills. The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the penalty in accordance with the law.Issue 4: Discretion of Tribunal in reducing penaltyThe appellant argued that the penalty under Section 11AC should not be imposed as the allegations were for irregular availment of credit without suppression or misstatement of facts. However, the Tribunal held that once Section 11AC applies, a 100% penalty is mandatory as per the Supreme Court's decision in Dharamendra Textiles. The Tribunal stated it cannot review earlier orders imposing penalties.Issue 5: Applicability of 100% penalty under Section 11ACThe Tribunal held that once Section 11AC applies, a penalty equivalent to 100% of the confirmed duty must be imposed. Following the Supreme Court's judgments, the penalty was enhanced to match the confirmed duty amount. The Tribunal emphasized that penalties under Section 11AC cannot be reduced once they are deemed applicable.This comprehensive analysis of the judgment covers the issues related to recalling of the ex parte order, confirmation of duty demand and penalty, reconsideration of penalty amount, Tribunal's discretion in reducing penalties, and the applicability of a 100% penalty under Section 11AC based on relevant legal precedents and court decisions.
TaxTMI 