V.K. Vora Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

V.K. Vora vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 19, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/38798

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/38798
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, Vice-
Decided On: Apr 19, 2005
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.K. Vora

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (2005)(187)ELT264Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of rs. 1 lakh imposed upon the applicant herein who is the vice-president of m/s.motorol speciality oils ltd. arises out of the order of the commissioner of central excise (appeals).2. penalty has been imposed on the ground that the applicant had knowledge that excisable goods were removed from the factory without payment of duty.3. on hearing both sides, i find prima facie contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the provision of rule 26 of the central excise rules, 2002 prima facie do not cover the present case. as prima facie the applicant has not dealt with any excisable goods which is the pre-requisite for imposition of penalty under rule 26. i, therefore, waive the pre-deposit of penalty and stay recovery, thereof pending the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 1 Lakh imposed upon the applicant herein who is the Vice-President of M/s.

Motorol Speciality Oils Ltd. arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals).

2. Penalty has been imposed on the ground that the applicant had knowledge that excisable goods were removed from the factory without payment of duty.

3. On hearing both sides, I find prima facie contention of learned Counsel for the applicant that the Provision of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 prima facie do not cover the present case. As prima facie the applicant has not dealt with any excisable goods which is the pre-requisite for imposition of penalty under Rule 26. I, therefore, waive the pre-deposit of penalty and stay recovery, thereof pending the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties V.K. Vora vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Excise Same Judge J Balasundaram, Vice-