2017 (3) TMI 168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The learned Commissioner has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakh on the appellant under Rule 25(1)(a) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are the manufacturers of branded readymade garments falling under Chapter 62 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On scrutiny of the monthly ER1 returns filed by the assessee for the period from October 2011 to August 2012, it was noticed that they have manufactured and cleared branded readymade garments on payment of Central Excise duty. In terms of Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the assessee became liable to pay duty on the clearances made during the month of October, 2011, amounting to Rs. 60,50,658/- by 05.11.2011. Simil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y 2012 has not been paid on consignment basis and has been paid on installment basis on 11.05.12/01.06.12/25.06.12. The interest on delayed payment of said duty works out to Rs. 1,91,978/-, out of which assessee have paid Rs. 1,52,894/-. It appeared that the duty for the months of July 2012 and August 2012 have not been paid by the assessee in terms of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 along with interest for delayed payment of duty. On these allegations, it appeared that the assessee has contravened the provisions of Rule 6, 8 and 12 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 inasmuch as the assessee have manufactured and cleared excisable goods during the period from 1.10.2011 to 31.10.2011 and paid the duty liability thereof beyond a perio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of sub-section (1), shall inform the Central Excise Officer of such payment in writing, who, on receipt of such information, shall not serve any notice under clause (a) of that sub-section in respect of the duty so paid or any penalty leviable under the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the following authorities: i. Premier Instruments &, Controls Limited. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise.: [2005] (183) E.L.T 65 (Tri - Chennai) ii. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Vs. Powerica Limited: [2012] (276) E.L.T 302 (Kar) iii. Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Bangalore -IVs. Geneva Fine Punch iv. Enclosures Limited. [2011] (267) E.L.T 481 (Ka....