Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Special Spring (India) Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 3 November, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III
Excise Appeal No. 1310 of 2011 SM
Excise Stay Application No. 1681 of 2011 SM
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 15/CE/DLH/2011 dated 4.3.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) , Delhi]
For approval and signature:
Hon'ble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see :
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 :
of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for
publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair :
copy of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the :
Departmental authorities?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M/s. Special Spring (India) Pvt. Ltd. Appellants
[
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise Respondent
New Delhi
Appearance:
Shri Ravinder Singh, Consultant for the Appellants
Shri S.K. Bhaskar, JDR for the Respondent
Date of Hearing/decision : 3.11.2011
ORAL ORDER NO . _______________________
Per Archna Wadhwa (for the Bench):
After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs.5,000/-, I proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as the issue lies in a narrow compass. The appellant is manufacturer of spring and exporting the same against letter of undertaking. The revenues allegation is that they did not submit the statement in Annexure 19 in respect of export of goods along with relevant documents in terms of para 13.2 of Chapter VII (Export without payment of duty) of the Supplementary Instructions, 2005 read with Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules 2002 and notification No. 42/2001 CE(NT) dated 26.6.01. As such, penalty stands imposed under the provisions of Rule 27 after raising and adjudicating show cause notice dated 15.10.09.
2. On the other hand, it is the appellants contention that filing of requisite information in an annexure 19 form is neither a legal nor a statutory requirement in terms of Rule 19 or notification No. 42/01-CE(NT) dated 26.6.01. The above contention of the appellant does not stand accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that Supplementary Instructions, 2005 are issued in terms of Rule 31 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and any contravention of the same has to be treated as contravention of the Central Excise Rules. As such, he has accordingly reduced the penalty of Rs.10,000/- to Rs.5,000/- by taking a lenient view.
3. I have seen the provisions of Rule 31 which empowers the Boards or Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner to issue instruction providing for any incidental or supplementary matters consistent with the provisions of Act and these rules. The appellants contention is that the instructions requiring them to file submissions in Annexure 19 form are not in consistent with the provisions of the Act and Rules. Rule 27 provides for imposition of general penalty for breach of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Inasmuch as non-filing of the submissions in Annexure 19 was not the requirement in terms of said Rules, I am of the view that penalty imposed under Rule 27 may not be justified.
4. I also note that information required to be filed in Annexure 19 was in any case available to the Revenue. As such, it remains only a technical or venial breach of provisions of rules, not resulting in any revenue loss to the exchequer. Support in this regard is drawn from the Honble Supreme Court decision in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa reported as [1998 ELT (J 159)]. As such, the penalty imposed to the extent of Rs. 5000/- in terms of Rules 27 is not justified. The same is accordingly, set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief.
5. Stay petition as also appeal gets disposed of in the above terms.
( Pronounced in the open Court)
( Archana Wadhwa ) Member(Judicial)
ss
3