2007 (10) TMI 491 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved: Application for waiver of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

Analysis:
1. Applicant's Contention: The applicant, a statutory auditor of a private limited company, filed for waiver of a penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The applicant argued that he was engaged for consultation purposes by the company and another firm, acting as a consultant. It was contended that he was not involved in any dealings with offending goods and that the company was established before any search took place, indicating no connection to accommodating seized currency from another firm.

2. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue claimed that a significant amount was seized from the office cum residence of another entity, and it was alleged that the applicant advised to falsely attribute the currency to the company he was associated with. The Revenue argued that the applicant colluded with the other entity to misrepresent the source of the seized currency as proceeds from clandestinely removed goods.

3. Judgment: The Tribunal found that the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules was imposed on the applicant, who was only a consultant to the firm. However, there was no evidence to suggest that the applicant tampered with account books to justify the seized amount. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the applicant had a strong case in their favor, and therefore, the entire penalty was waived. The stay petition was allowed, indicating a favorable decision for the applicant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the arguments presented by both parties, the key contentions, and the ultimate decision of the Tribunal in favor of the applicant, emphasizing the lack of evidence against the applicant and the granting of the waiver of the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules.