The appellant was issued penalty u/r 26(2) of Central Excise ...

Penalty u/r 26(2) quashed; appellant vindicated. Invoices valid, goods received, duty paid.

Case Laws Central Excise

July 26, 2024

The appellant was issued penalty u/r 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, alleging that second stage dealers based in Jaipur were issuing cenvatable invoices to the main noticee without delivering goods, which were purchased from first stage dealers and manufactured by non-existent or non-working manufacturers. The Commissioner (Appeals) recorded categorical findings that the main noticee had duly received goods and made duty payment. Tribunal held that when the demand for cenvat credit itself is not maintainable, there is no justification to affirm penalty on the appellant. Following the principles enunciated by Division Bench in Drolia Electrosteel case, where department accepted findings of Commissioner (Appeals), there is no justification to uphold penalty imposition on appellant. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The appellant was issued penalty u/r 26(2) of Central Excise ...

Penalty u/r 26(2) quashed; appellant vindicated. Invoices valid, goods received, duty paid.

Case Laws Central Excise

July 26, 2024

You may also like:

Penalty for false invoice - Section 55(2) AP VAT Act states that any VAT dealer, who issues a false tax invoice or receives and uses a tax invoice, knowing it to be...

Imposition of penalty under Rule 26 (2) of CER - availment of irregular CENVAT Credit - invoices without actual receipt of inputs - Though the opting of SVLDRS should...

Imposition of penalty u/r 25 of CER - Second stage Dealer - Violation in respect of issuing Invoice - proper invoices were not issued and consequently, there is...

Duty chargeable on quantity of goods received or invoice value – even if appellant would have received lesser quantity of goods in shore tanks, invoice value charged and...

Levy of penalty u/r 26 - Personal penalty for abatement in evasion of duty - a plain reading of Rule 26 indicates that imposition of the penalty therein is not tied to a...

Penalty under Rule 26(1) of Central excise rules 2002 - Bogus Cenvatable invoices issued - the appellant was liable to pay penalty - AT

Demand of interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by invoking extended period of limitation - Interest on duty paid on supplementary invoices - The...

Imposition of penalty - Issue of bogus invoices - Penalty under Rule 26, whether under sub-Rule (1) of Rule 26 or under sub-Rule (2) of Rule 26 can be imposed on a...

Impugned orders set aside, cases remitted to re-examine issue in light of CBIC Circular No.221/15/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024. Petitioner prima facie not liable to pay tax...

Levy of penalty on Proprietor of the Firm under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - fraudulent availment of CENVAT Credit - Taking note of the fact that penalty...

Penalty - Bogus invoice issued without selling the goods – penalty would be attracted under Rule 25 (1) (d) as well as Rule 26(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - AT

Exemption from payment of GST compensation cess to SEZ unit - A conjunctive study of Section 26(1)(a), 2(zd) of SEZ Act, 2005 and Section 2(15) of Customs Act, 1962...

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...

Interpretation of statute - Section 2(26) of Customs Act - Scope of the term Importer - High Sea Sale - Adjudicating authority treated the appellant neither the importer...

Reduction in quantum of penalty imposed under Rule 26(2) (i) & (ii) - the Tribunal would say that there is no revenue loss because M/s.Sujana Metal Products Limited have...

Quick Updates: