News Update

Import Prohibition - Reference to the Patents Act, 1970 omitted from notification 51/2010-Cus(NT)Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 amendedImport of Milk and Milk Products from China - import prohibition extended till 23.12.2018I-T - Tax deducted at source on income of charitable trust cannot be treated as taxable income: ITATGST - Howrah Commissionerate detects Rs 43 Crore tax evasion through fake invoicesGeM - Transactions worth Rs 8700 Crore done in short time, says PMRanchi NCB seizes 400 kg ganja from truck in Bokaro Steel CityIndia to make Chabahar Port operation by 2019: GadkariST - For any inaction on part of Revenue to submit Final Verification Report, petitioners cannot be made to suffer - matter remanded to Settlement Commission: High CourtGST: A Frightening but Fascinating Future world…! – Part III (See 'TOG INSIGHT')I-T - Application of fund for benefit of earthquake victims and its communication to donee before stipulated date, is sufficient for charitable trust to avail benefit of exemption u/s 80G(5C): HCPanama Papers - Leak-I - Out of 426 only 76 cases found actionable: GovtST - Taxability is not determined by section 67 of Finance Act, 1994 but by coverage in section 65: CESTATCIC decides proceedings not to abate even if complainant diesGovt sets up Panel to update Voluntary Guidelines on Social, Environmental & Economic Responsibilities of Business12 lakh pax electric cars sold in 2017; up by 58% from 2016: UNCommerce Department to get new homeCentre invites views on draft CSR guidelinesCanada passes bill to legalise use of marijuana from Oct 17, 2018Govt appoints Mr M K Sinha as new Joint Secy - TRU-IIDrive Against Shell Companies - A cul-de-sac!Liquor licences: Undoubtedly Taxable before as well as after GST Roll outMCA invites comments on Draft on cross-border insolvencyCBDT notifies PFC & Railway Finance Corp 54EC Capital Gains Bonds
 
CX – As there is no proceeding u/s 11A(1) against appellant, benefit of proviso to 11A(2) is not available to co-noticee – Penalty u/r 26 upheld: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 17, 2017: IN a CE case booked against M/s. Air Carrying Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. , the appellant was a co-noticee against whom penal provisions were invoked.

The demand of duty was confirmed and penalty was imposed against the main noticee. Penalty was also imposed on appellantu/r 26 of the CER.

Aggrieved,the appellant isbefore the Tribunal.

It is submitted that the main noticee, M/s. Air Carrying Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. had paid the entire duty along with interest and 25% of penalty within 30 days of the order and consequently, in terms of Section 11A(1A) of the CEA, 1944, the proceedings against the co-noticeeget abated.

And, therefore, the penalty imposed should be dropped as rule 26 of CER should be r/w Section 11A of the CEA, 1944.

The AR supported the order.

The Single Member Bench extracted the provisions of Section 11A(1A), (2) of the CEA, 1944 and observed -

4.1 It is seen that the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11A provides that if the main noticee has paid the duty in full together with interest and penalty under sub-section (1A), the proceedings in respect of such persons and such other persons to whom notices are served under sub-section (1) shall, without prejudice to the provisions of Section 9, 9A and 9AA be deemed to be conclusive as to the matters stated herein.

Inasmuch as since in the instant case, there are no proceedings under sub-section (1) of Section 11A against the appellant, the benefit of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11A is not available to the appellant, the CESTAT held.

The appeal was dismissed.

Missed the bus -

++ By Notification No.  8/2016-CENT  dated 1.3.2016, the Central Excise Rules were amended to add a proviso after Rule 26(1):

Provided that where any proceeding for the person liable to pay duty have been concluded under clause (a) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 11AC of the Act in respect of duty, interest and penalty, all proceedings in respect of penalty against other persons, if any, in the said proceedings shall also be deemed to be concluded .

++ Also see CBEC Circular No. 11/2016-Customs., Dated: March 15, 2016

++ Can proceedings against co-noticees be deemed to be concluded if main assessee pays duty, interest and penalty [ DDT 2110 ]

In favour:

++ 2013-TIOL-1048-CESTAT-DEL 

++ 2016-TIOL-28-CESTAT-MUM , 2013-TIOL-768-CESTAT-MUM , 2016-TIOL-855-CESTAT-MUM [All Single Member Bench decisions]

Contra view –

++ 2013-TIOL-26-CESTAT-DEL [SMB]

++ 2015-TIOL-756-CESTAT-MUM [SMB]

(See 2017-TIOL-2453-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS