In absence of direct or indirect involvement of the Managing ...

Managing Director Not Liable u/r 26 for Goods Removal Without Evidence of Involvement.

May 23, 2013

Case Laws Central Excise AT

In absence of direct or indirect involvement of the Managing Director in the clandestine removal of the goods no personal penalty under Rule 26 is imposable on him. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

In absence of direct or indirect involvement of the Managing ...

Managing Director Not Liable u/r 26 for Goods Removal Without Evidence of Involvement.

May 23, 2013

Case Laws Central Excise AT

You may also like:

Clandestine removal of excisable goods - Penalty u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 imposed on Managing Director. Appellant challenged Order upholding penalty without...

Levy of penalty on Director u/r 26 of CER - involvement of the director of the appellants in clandestine activities or not - here are not much reasoning has been...

Clandestine removal of goods - assumption / presumption - demand based on the statement - charge of clandestine removal is not sustainable in the absence of any...

Penalty imposed u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules 2002 set aside due to violation of principles of natural justice and lack of evidence. Department's case based solely on...

Levy of penalty u/r 26 on the Director of the company - Allegation of Clandestine removal of goods - The Tribunal observed that the statement of an employee, admitting...

Clandestine removal - Jurisdiction - The statement of the Managing Director recorded under Section 14 of the Act of 1944 could be relied upon and treated as a relevant...

Oppression and mismanagement - removal of MD/Director - in the notice there was an agenda for removal of 1st respondent as Managing Director and not director -...

Levy of penalty - the penalty under Section 26 is inextricably linked to the confiscation of goods as long as there is no confiscation of the goods ordered that there...

Levy of penalty on Director of the company - The appellant being a Director of the Company involved in the entire Modus Operandi of fraudulent availment of credit and...

The court interpreted Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that managing directors and joint managing directors are responsible for the company's...

HC affirmed vicarious liability of company directors under Sections 138/141 of NI Act in cheque dishonor case. Directors challenged summoning orders claiming...

Clandestine Removal - reliability of statements - sufficiency of evidence or not - In a serious case such as evasion of duty by fraud, the degree of appreciation of...

Non-executive director's vicarious liability in a company u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act examined. For making a non-executive director liable, there must be...

Penalty under rule 26 of the CER, 2002 can be imposed on a person only when it is proved beyond doubt that the person dealing with excisable goods knew or had reason to...

Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear that unless and until there is sufficient evidence about the mens area/ intent on the part of the...

Quick Updates: