TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Lakshmi Sriram, learned counsel assisting Mr. T. Sasikrishnan, learned counsel on record for the petitioner and Mr. S. Rajasekar, learned senior Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has impugned the order passed by the first respondent, namely Customs, Central Excise Settlement Commission. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 29-10-2004 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the excise duty amount of Rs. 9,72,960/- on the excisable goods cleared without payment of duty during October, 1999 to March, 2004 should not be demanded from the petitioner under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944? why the amount paid by the petitioner vide challan dated 5-10-2004 should not be appropriated towards the above duty amount demanded? Why interest amount as applicable under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 should not be charged?, why penalty equivalent to the above amount should not be imposed on the petitioner under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944? and why penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 should not be imposed on the petitioner?

(3.) The petitioner had an opportunity to submit their objection to the show cause notice. However, the petitioner chose to file an application before the first respondent for settlement of the case. The Settlement Commission took up the matter for consideration and found that the applicant, namely the petitioners have not filed their returns at any time during the relevant period showing production, clearance and duty paid in the prescribed manner. Therefore, it was held that the applicant does not satisfy the requirement of Section 32E(1) of the Act due to non-filing of the returns as mentioned in clause (A) contained in the proviso to Section 32E of the Act. This order is impugned by the petitioner in this writ petition.