Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Quality Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Quality Industries vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Feb 04, 1999
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/15130

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On
Subject
Contract

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Contract

Key legal issue
Contract

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Quality Industries

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In
(1999)(112)ELT155Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. this case was listed for admission. but looking at the circumstances, it was felt appropriate that the main appeal itself should be taken up for disposal. this was done after agreement from both the sides.2. the assessee cleared some goods when the balance in their pla was not sufficient to cover the amount of duty involved. the credit in their pla was made vide tr-6 challan filed on 8-7-1993 which showed that the assessee's bank had given pay order on the nodal bank branch on 9-7-1993 and that the same had been received by the nodal bank on the same date. the case of the appellant is that they had no deliberate intention to evade duty and that in 16 years of their having been an assessee, not a single contravention had been committed by them. the delay in securing the pay order was on account of their employees mistake. it is claimed that the assessee incurred a substantial loss of interest because of deposit of the full amount of penalty.3. on consideration of the facts and the arguments made, i am satisfied that it was a case of technical violation. i, therefore, reduce the quantum of penalty from rs. 20,000/- to rs. 500/- (rupees five hundred).4. ordered accordingly. consequential relief should be granted to the assessee.

Full Judgment

1. This case was listed for admission. But looking at the circumstances, it was felt appropriate that the main appeal itself should be taken up for disposal. This was done after agreement from both the sides.

2. The assessee cleared some goods when the balance in their PLA was not sufficient to cover the amount of duty involved. The credit in their PLA was made vide TR-6 challan filed on 8-7-1993 which showed that the assessee's bank had given pay order on the Nodal bank branch on 9-7-1993 and that the same had been received by the Nodal bank on the same date. The case of the appellant is that they had no deliberate intention to evade duty and that in 16 years of their having been an assessee, not a single contravention had been committed by them. The delay in securing the pay order was on account of their employees mistake. It is claimed that the assessee incurred a substantial loss of interest because of deposit of the full amount of penalty.

3. On consideration of the facts and the arguments made, I am satisfied that it was a case of technical violation. I, therefore, reduce the quantum of penalty from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five hundred).

4. Ordered accordingly. Consequential relief should be granted to the assessee.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial