2004 (4) TMI 361 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Penalty imposition under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on appellants for alleged involvement in clandestine processing and removal of M.M. Fabrics without payment of duty.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 1 Lakh on each of the appellants under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The duty was confirmed against one firm for engaging in clandestine processing and removal of M.M. Fabrics. The Commissioner of Central Excise had imposed penalties on several noticees, including the appellants, for aiding and abetting in sending goods for processing without duty payment. The son of the owner of a firm, who had sent goods for processing, was also penalized after his father's death, despite claiming ignorance of the business dealings. The Commissioner's order lacked discussion on the first appellant's role, and penalties seemed based on assumptions of assistance without concrete evidence of involvement during the father's illness. Another appellant, an employee of two firms that sent fabrics for processing, had penalties imposed without sufficient evidence of direct involvement. The Tribunal found no conclusive evidence of direct involvement by these appellants to warrant penalties under Rule 209A and consequently set aside the penalties imposed on them.