2004 (12) TMI 195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e penalty on the appellant has been imposed under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. He submitted that the Provisions of the said rule clearly provide that the penalty can be imposed on the person, when he acquires possession of, or is in any way concerned in transporting, removing, keeping, selling or in any other manner deals with, any excisable goods which he knows or has reason to be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n accused. In support of his contention he relied on the following decisions : - (i) Star Paper Mills Ltd. - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 607 (Tri. - Del.). Penalty not imposable in the absence of confiscation of goods. (ii) Ram Nath Singh - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 451 (Tri. - Del.). Penalty under Rule 209A not imposable in absence of any allegation that the appellant had in any manner dealt with any excisable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri U.H. Jadhav, ld. JDR reiterated the order of the lower Authorities. 3. After hearing both sides and perusal of the records and the case laws, I am fully convinced that the co-accused cannot be vested with any higher penal consequences than the main accused. Since the main accused stands absolved of the penal consequences, there is no question of imposition of penalty on the appellant. The i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X