2014 (7) TMI 402

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. alongwith imposition of penalty of identical amount. In addition, penalty of Rs. 50,000/- stand imposed on the second appellant Shri R.P. Sharma, Manager of M/s Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. in terms of the provisions of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules. 2. After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri Manish Pushkarna, Advocate the learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri M.S. Negi, learned DR for the respondent, I find that M/s Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of gutkha and pan masala. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 18/10/03, who conducted various checks and verifications. Certain excesses and shortages were detected, which are not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fficers. He also prays for setting aside penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the Manager, in as much as there is no evidence on record indicating that he was the one associated with the clandestine clearances. For the above propositions, learned advocate relies upon the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in the case of CCE vs. Gowardhan Knitting Works reported in 2010 (260) E.L.T. 77 (P&H). 7. Countering the arguments, learned DR appearing for the Revenue submits that the said decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court is not applicable to the facts of this case, in as much as there is nothing in the said decision to reveal that the original Adjudicating Authority had given option to the assessee to pay the duty, interest and 25% o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to 25%. Where such an option has not been extended to the assessees by the original Adjudicating Authority, courts have taken a view that such an option can be extended at the time of appeal stage. However, in the present case, I find that the Joint Commissioner, while adjudicating the show cause notice has, in clear terms, extended the said option to the appellant, who have chosen not to avail the same. Once such option was given to the assessee, who have failed to exercise the same, the reduction of penalty at the second appellate stage would neither be justified nor in accordance with the provisions of law. The entire idea of depositing the dues alongwith 25% of penalty within a period of 30 days from the passing of the order by the ori....