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 overturns duty, penalty, and interest order against cigarette distributors accused of abetting clandestine clearance.</h1> <h3>Shri Rakesh Kumar Tibra Proprietor, M/s. Shekhawati Trading Co., Shri Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal, Proprietor, M/s. Rajesh Brothers, Shri Prahlad Gupta, Proprietor, M/s. Om Agency, Shri Suresh Kumar Tibra, Proprietor, M/s. Rajasthan Trading Co. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Bhopal (M. P.).</h3> Shri Rakesh Kumar Tibra Proprietor, M/s. Shekhawati Trading Co., Shri Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal, Proprietor, M/s. Rajesh Brothers, Shri Prahlad Gupta, ... Issues:1. Duty, penalty, and interest demanded from distributors of cigarettes.2. Imposition of penalty on distributors for alleged involvement in clandestine clearance of cigarettes.3. Appeal based on previous Tribunal decision regarding Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd.4. Rival contentions between the appellant's counsel and the Authorized Representative.5. Final decision based on the Tribunal's previous order in the case of Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd.Analysis:1. The appeals were made against the order-in-original demanding duty, penalty, and interest from distributors of cigarettes. The distributors were accused of purchasing cigarettes manufactured and clandestinely cleared by Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd., leading to the imposition of a penalty of Rs.2 lakh each under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The distributors were found to have abetted the clandestine clearance of cigarettes by Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd., resulting in the penalty imposition.2. The appellant's counsel argued that a previous Tribunal decision regarding Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd. had found the allegation of clandestine clearance unsustainable, leading to the setting aside of penalties imposed on Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others. Based on this, the counsel urged that the penalty on the distributors should also be set aside in the interest of justice.3. The Authorized Representative relied on the impugned order, presenting a contrasting viewpoint to the appellant's counsel. However, the Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions and the previous order in the case of Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd., decided that the cause of action against the distributors did not survive. Consequently, the impugned order-in-original against the distributors was set aside, along with the penalties imposed on them. The appeals were allowed with consequential benefits, aligning with the decision in the case of Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the final decision rendered by the Tribunal based on the previous order regarding Lucky Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd.
TaxTMI 