Pre-notice duty payment bars mandatory excise penalty and interest; a non-existent penalty cannot be reduced under appeal.

Where duty was paid before the show cause notice, mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and consequential interest under Section 11AB were treated as not invocable, so the relief from penalty and interest was upheld. The text also notes that a Commissioner (Appeals) cannot reduce a Rule 173Q penalty when the original authority had not imposed any such penalty; treating a non-existent penalty as reduced was an apparent error, so the purported confirmation was set aside. The Revenue challenge failed and the assessee's cross appeal succeeded, resulting in deletion of the Rule 173Q penalty and confirmation of the relief from statutory penalty and interest.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were invocable when the duty had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice; (ii) Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in reducing the penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 when the original authority had dropped the penal proceedings under the said rule.

Issue (i): Whether mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 were invocable when the duty had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice.

Analysis: The duty had been discharged before the show cause notice was issued. The Tribunal followed the earlier view that, in such circumstances, the statutory penalty under Section 11AC and the consequential interest under Section 11AB were not attracted. The reasoning accepted that prior payment of duty before notice took the case outside the rigour of the mandatory penal provision relied upon by the Revenue.

Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge on this issue failed and the setting aside of penalty and interest was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in reducing the penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 when the original authority had dropped the penal proceedings under the said rule.

Analysis: The original adjudication order had dropped the penal proceedings under the other provisions of the Act and Rules, and no penalty under Rule 173Q had in fact been imposed. The Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, proceeded on an premise in treating a Rule 173Q penalty as if it existed and in reducing it on a lenient view. The mistake was apparent from the record.

Conclusion: The assessee's cross appeal succeeded and the purported confirmation of penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal was rejected, while the assessee's cross appeal was allowed, resulting in deletion of the Rule 173Q penalty and affirmance of the relief from Section 11AC penalty and Section 11AB interest.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty is paid before issuance of the show cause notice, mandatory penalty and consequential interest are not invocable; and a penalty cannot be reduced where no such penalty was imposed by the original authority.

---