9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll the appellants, it is clearly stated that they are liable for penalty under rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Therefore, there is no doubt that the penalty was imposed under Rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. In the present case the period involved is 2005-06 Rule 26(2)(ii) was inserted vide Notification No.8/2007-CE(NT) dated 01.03.2007 (effective from 01.04.2007), therefore, the provision of Rule 26(2)(ii) cannot be made applicable retrospectively for the period prior to 01.04.2007. For this reason alone the penalties imposed on the appellants are not sustainable. From the reading of the Rule, it can be seen that a person can be penalized under this rule, only if he is involved in various activities of handling o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (TECHNICAL) Shri Parth Mullick, Advocate for the Appellant Shri P. K. Singh, Superintended (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the cases are that in respect of all the appellants a penalty under Rule 26 was imposed in connection with the case against M/s Nitin Alloys Global Ltd. on which there is a charge that M/s. Nitin Alloys Global Ltd has taken the credit without receipt of the goods. The charge against the present appellant are that they have facilitated for availing a fraudulent Cenvat credit to M/s Nitin Alloys Global Ltd, in their capacity of transporter, CHA, High Seas Seller. The penalty was imposed under Rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. Shri Parth Mullick, Learned counsel, appearing on the behal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no doubt that the penalty was imposed under Rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 4.1 In the present case the period involved is 2005-06 Rule 26(2)(ii) was inserted vide Notification No.8/2007-CE(NT) dated 01.03.2007 (effective from 01.04.2007), therefore, the provision of Rule 26(2)(ii) cannot be made applicable retrospectively for the period prior to 01.04.2007. For this reason alone the penalties imposed on the appellants are not sustainable. 4.2 Without prejudice to the above finding we also find that even if it is assumed that the penalty is imposed under Rule 26, the same Rule is reproduce below: "Rule 26. Penalty for certain offences. (1) Any person who acquires possession of, or is in any way concerned i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
