Legacy dispute settlement bars confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties arising from the same excise demand and period.

A discharge certificate under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 is conclusive for the matter and period covered, and bars further duty, interest, penalty, or reopening of the same dispute. Where confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties under the Central Excise Act and Rules arise from the same investigation and period as the settled duty demand, they cannot survive separately. The Tribunal treated confiscation and redemption fine as consequences of non-payment of duty and part of the same controversy, so the benefit of the Scheme could not be confined to duty alone. The confiscation order, redemption fine, and connected penalties were therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether confiscation of seized goods, redemption fine, and penalties under the Central Excise Act and the Central Excise Rules could survive when the duty demand arising from the same investigation and the same period had already been settled under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 and a discharge certificate had been issued.

Analysis: The Scheme under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 2019 provides that a discharge certificate is conclusive as to the matter and time period covered by the declaration and bars further duty, interest, penalty, or reopening of the same matter. The Tribunal noted that the demand, interest, and penalties relating to the second show cause notice had already been settled under the Scheme and that the discharge certificate had attained finality. It then examined the nature of confiscation and redemption fine under the Central Excise Act and relied on the view that confiscation and redemption fine are consequences of non-payment of duty and form part of the same dispute. Since the seizure/confiscation proceedings and the duty demand arose from the same investigation and the same period, the benefit of the Scheme could not be restricted to duty alone while leaving redemption fine and confiscation alive.

Conclusion: The confiscation order with redemption fine and the connected penalties could not be sustained after the discharge certificate was issued for the same dispute and period; the challenge succeeded in favour of the assessee.

---