Central Excise penalty and recovery rules can jointly fasten payment liability on a company signatory without creating double levy.

Central Excise penalty provisions were read with the recovery rule to determine whether liability could extend beyond the company to the person who signed the declaration. Rule 173-Q was treated as the source of penalty liability against the manufacturer, producer or licensee, while Rule 221(2) was treated as a recovery provision that fastens payment liability on the corporation and the signatory. On that construction, the provisions operated in distinct fields of levy and collection, so treating the petitioner as liable for payment of the company's penalty did not create an impermissible double levy. The challenge to the penalty was rejected and the liability was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty for contravention of the Central Excise Rules could be levied only on the company as manufacturer or whether, on a combined reading of the relevant rules, the petitioner who signed the declaration could also be made liable for payment of the penalty.

Analysis: Rule 173-Q governs confiscation and the imposition of penalty on the manufacturer, producer or licensee for contravention of the rules. Rule 221(2), by contrast, deals with payment and recovery of duties and penalties and fastens liability on the corporation as an entity and on the person signing the declaration. The two provisions operate in different spheres: one creates the liability to penalty, while the other facilitates its collection. On that construction, the appellate authority's order did not amount to an impermissible double levy, but treated the petitioner as liable for payment of the penalty imposed in relation to the company.

Conclusion: The petitioner's challenge to the penalty failed, and the liability sustained against him was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The order confirming the penalty was maintained, and the writ appeal was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A provision imposing penalty on the manufacturer may be read with a recovery provision so that the corporation and the person signing on its behalf can be made liable for payment, without creating an impermissible double levy, where the rules operate in distinct fields of levy and collection.

---