2005 P T D 751

[Lahore High Court]

Before Tanvir Bashir Ansari and Muhammad Sair Ali, JJ

Messrs GULBERG KABANA RESTAURANT through General Manager

versus

ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, CENTRAL EXCISE NO.II, LAHORE and 2 others

Appeal C.A. No. 54 of 1999, decided on 15/12/2004.

Central Excises Act (I of 1944)‑‑‑

‑‑‑‑Ss.9, 11 & 36‑C‑‑‑Appeal to High Court‑‑‑Non‑payment of Central Excise Duty in time‑‑‑Imposition of penalty‑‑‑Appellant made substantial payment of Central Excise Duty levied upon it, but could not pay balance amount in time and penalty was imposed upon it for such default‑‑‑ Appellate Tribunal reduced amount of penalty holding that non‑payment of Excise Duty by appellant was not deliberate or wilful‑‑‑Penalty imposed on appellant was set aside by High Court with direction to deposit balance amount within a period of seven days failing which itsappeal would stand dismissed.

Sahibzada Riaz Anwar for Appellant.

Abdul Karim Malik for Respondent.

ORDER

This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 9‑2 1999 passed by the Customs Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Lahore Bench whereby the liability of the appellant to respect of Central Excise Duty in respect of Rs.90625 was maintained while the penalty was reduced from 7.25 million to Rs.25,000. While reducing the penalty, the learned Tribunal was persuaded by the consideration that non‑payment of the Central Excise Duty on time was as a result of misunderstanding rather than being deliberate or wilful.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant as well as for respondents were heard on 14‑12‑2004 when the learned counsel for the parties sought a short adjournment for seeking instructions from the parties.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that as the non payment of the Central Excise Duty on time has not been found to be deliberate or wilful, there is no justification for imposing any penalty upon the appellants. Regarding the payment of the Central Excise Duty itself, the learned counsel stated that he has made, substantial payment towards the same and if some time is granted to the appellants they shall deposit the balance amount. .

4. Mr. Abdul Karim Malik, Advocate for respondents after consulting his record submits that total claim oaf the department as against the appellants amounts to Rs.90,625 as Central Excise Duty along with Rs.25,000 as penalty. Out of this the appellants have made the payment of Rs.50,000 only and a sum of Rs.40,625 as Central Excise Duty and a sum of Rs.25,000 as penalty is still outstanding. It is also submitted that the learned Tribunal has itself shown indulgence to the appellant while reducing the penalty to Rs.25,000 only and that the appellants were not entitled to any further concession.

5. Arguments have been heard and record perused.

6: The appellant does not dispute the levy of the Central Excise` Duty as mentioned in the impugned judgment. It is also established on f the record and conceded by the learned counsel for the respondents that total liability of the appellants is Rs.1,15,625 including penalty out of which a sum of Rs.50,000 has since been paid.

7. We are inclined to agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant that it has been held by the Tribunal itself that the non‑payment of the duty on time was not deliberate or wilful. Upholding the same we are minded to set aside the penalty imposed by the learned Tribunal.

8. In view of the foregoing the appellant is directed to deposit the balance of Rs.40,625 within a period of 7 days from the date of this order. In the event of his failure to do the same within the prescribed period the appeal shall stand dismissed.

9. The C.A. is disposed of in the above terms along with all ancilliary civil miscellaneous applications.

H.B.T./G‑96/LOrder accordingly.