75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

October 2011

(2011) 23 STR 345 (Kar.) — Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore v. Dee Pee En Corporation.

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri
Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 2 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Quantum of penalty — Whether penalty could be levied at the rate of Rs.100 per day on failure to pay duty by the assessee for period prior to 10-9-2004.

Facts:
The issue for consideration was whether the appellant could levy penalty at the rate of Rs.100 per day on failure to pay duty by the assessee for the period prior to 10-9-2004 or not. According to the assessee, the provisions of section 76 to levy penalty at the rate of Rs.100 per day came only from 10-9-2004 and thus it could not be levied retrospectively. The Department relying on the judgment in the case of ETA Engineering Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai 2004 (174) ELT 19 (Tri.- LB) contended that even for the period prior to 10-9-2004, the Tribunal had confirmed the order of levying penalty at the rate of Rs.100 per day.

Held:
The Tribunal observed that the judgment of ETA Engineering Ltd. was not applicable to this case as it did not consider effective date of the amended provision. It was held that penalty at the rate of Rs.100 per day was leviable for the period 10-9-2004 onwards and not prior to the said date.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

The Second Freedom Struggle – Our Unfinished Agenda

Reassessment: Sections 143(3), 147 and 148 of Income-tax Act, 1961: A.Y. 1999-00: Assessment u/s.143(3): Subsequent reopening of assessment (beyond 4 years): The recorded reasons must indicate as to how there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the facts fully and truly: Lapse on the part of the AO cannot be a ground for reopening when the primary facts are disclosed.