LAWS(CE)-2009-1-151

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VAPI Vs. BHARAT SINGH

Decided On January 30, 2009
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VAPI Appellant
V/S
BHARAT SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the decision of the Commissioner who has set aside the penalty on the authorized signatory of the respondents on the ground that the assessees main case arising out of same investigation was settled by the settlement Commission wherein penalty on the co -applicants was set aside and immunity was granted. The learned DR on behalf of the Revenue submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred. Actually there were two show cause notices and the settlement Commission had settled the case in respect of only one show cause notice and therefore the immunity was not granted in respect of the second show cause notice. The learned advocate on behalf of the respondents agrees that there was no immunity granted in the second case. However, he cites the decision of the Tribunal in Shitala Prasad Sharma v. C.C.E., Mumbai, reported in 2005 (183) E.L.T. 21 (Tri. -Mumbai) and submits that since no penalty has been imposed in the case settled by the Settlement Commission which involved duty evasion of more than Rs. 8 lakhs, in the second show cause notice which involved only less than Rs. 2 lakhs, penalty need not be imposed.

(2.) I have considered the rival submissions. The authorized signatory of the respondents is responsible for fulfilment of all obligations under excise law and therefore it cannot be said that he was not fully aware of what he was doing and without his active cooperation and involvement aviation (sic) of duty cannot take place. Since the second show cause notice was not the subject of settlement, the Commissioner should have considered the role of the authorized signatory and decided whether penalty should have been imposed. In view of the observations made by me about the role of authorized signatory above, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and a penalty of Rs. 2000/ - is imposed on Shri Bharat Singh, the authorized signatory. The appeal filed by the Revenue is disposed of in above terms.