Commr. of Cus., C. Ex. & Service Tax vs Honda Siel Power Products Ltd.

Having heard Sri B.K.S. Raghuvanshi, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.D. Singh, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the assessee, we find that the goods were cleared by the assessee to its another unit. When the goods were initially cleared, the assessee cleared the credit taken for other duties but inadvertently could not clear the CVD. The same was done subsequently, along with the interest. For this action, penalty was imposed by the Department under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellate authority reduced the penalty to Rs. 2.00 lakhs. In appeal before the Tribunal, the penalty was removed holding that the assessee was not having any mala fide intention for clearing the duty. The Department, being aggrieved, has filed the present appeal contending that the quantum of penalty cannot be reduced by the first appellate authority.

We find that the goods were cleared by the assessee to its sister unit and whatever credit was reversed by the assessee, the same was made available to its sister unit. Section 11AC of the Act provides payment of penalty where there is any intention to evade payment of penalty. In the instant case, we do not find that the assessee has committed fraud, collusion or willful mis-statement or suppression of fact with an intention to evade payment of duty. We do not find any substantial question of arising for consideration. The appeal is dismissed.