PHILIPS ELECTRONICS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are two stay applications; (1) Stay Application No. 2017/06 filed along with Appeal No. E/2467/06 pertains to M/s. Philips Electronics Ny (hereinafter referred to 'Philips Holland'); and (2) Stay Application No. 1998/06 filed along with Appeal No. E/2442/06 pertains to M/s. Philips Electronics India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'PIL').

(2.) BOTH these appeals have challenged the order of the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Chandigarh, made on 17 -4 -2006. In the impugned order, the Commissioner after sieving and weighing the fact of the matter has arrived at the conclusion that the appellants were engaged in activities in such a manner that the provisions of Central Excise Act got violated causing injury to the Revenue. It was also inferred that M/s. Punjab Anand Lamp Industries (hereinafter referred to as 'PALI') and M/s. Philips India were related persons in terms of Section 4(4)(c) of the Act and as a result, Central Excise Duty on excisable goods cleared by PALI to Philips India were to be charged at a price at which Philips India sold the said goods to their first independent buyer. In the result, a sum of Rs. 5,13,78,778/ - was demanded from PALI. Penalty of equal amount was also imposed on them. In addition, a penalty of Rs. 2.50 crores each was imposed on Philips India and on Philips Holland under the impugned order, the Commissioner went ahead confiscating the land, building, plant and machinery giving, however, an option to PALI to redeem the same on payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 1 crore.

(3.) AS both the stay applications pertain to the same order of the Commissioner, we deal with the matter jointly.