Jak Exim Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Jak Exim vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jul 31, 2006

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/43281

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/43281
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T S.S.
Decided On: Jul 31, 2006
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jak Exim

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

1. appellants are aggrieved by the imposition of penalty of rs. 10,000/- for having delayed filing of the return er-3 for the month of feb. & march 2004 which was required to be filed, every quarter & was to be filed on 20-5-2005 but was filed on 30-6-2004 (sic). the assessee was registered on 4-2-2004 under central excise act, 1944, & this was the first return. revenue has failed to show the prejudice or and loss caused by this delay, on the first occasion of filing. power to impose a penalty, under the act and the rules, is not a crop in hand to be unleashed on an assessee, especially one who is new to the procedures and compliance required. there has to be a nexus of the delay with certain advantage to the assessee and correspondence disadvantage to the revenue. none shown. therefore, the penalty is therefore set aside & appeal allowed as this step, after waiver of pre-deposit.

Full Judgment

1. Appellants are aggrieved by the imposition of penalty of Rs. 10,000/- for having delayed filing of the return ER-3 for the month of Feb. & March 2004 which was required to be filed, every quarter & was to be filed on 20-5-2005 but was filed on 30-6-2004 (sic). The assessee was Registered on 4-2-2004 under Central Excise Act, 1944, & this was the first return. Revenue has failed to show the prejudice or and loss caused by this delay, on the first occasion of filing. Power to impose a Penalty, under the act and the rules, is not a crop in hand to be unleashed on an assessee, especially one who is new to the procedures and compliance required. There has to be a nexus of the delay with certain advantage to the assessee and correspondence disadvantage to the Revenue. None shown. Therefore, the penalty is therefore set aside & appeal allowed as this step, after waiver of pre-deposit.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Jak Exim vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Miscellaneous Same Judge S T S.S.