2008 (2) TMI 801 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against setting aside personal penalty imposed on respondent by Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad stemmed from the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the personal penalty imposed on the respondent. The Commissioner's order highlighted that both units were trading and registered as dealers, maintaining records and issuing invoices under the Central Excise Act Rules. However, discrepancies were noted during verification where non-excisable goods were found in the premises contrary to excisable goods mentioned in the invoices. The evidence relied upon was solely the statement of the director of another company, lacking independent corroboration. Consequently, the Commissioner (Appeals) found the penalty imposition unsustainable, as the requirements of Rule 209A were not met for both appellants.

The Appellate Tribunal observed that the revenue failed to provide any evidence to support the original adjudicating authority's findings. It concurred with the Commissioner (Appeals) that penalizing the respondent based solely on the statement of a co-accused without corroborative evidence was not justified. The Tribunal upheld the view that the penalty imposition lacked substantiation and was therefore unsustainable. As a result, the appeal against setting aside the personal penalty on the respondent was rejected, and the cross-objection was disposed of accordingly. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J., with Shri. K.J. Sanchis, JDR, representing the Appellant and no representation for the Respondent.