Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 954 - CESTAT HYDERABADLevy of penalty - It is contended that, Penalty under Rule 26(2) provision can be imposed only on a natural person. - The appellant is a partnership firm and per se is not a natural person - CENVAT credit - duty paying documents - fake invoices - fraudulent availment of CENVAT Credit based on invoices issued without actual supply of material mentioned in the invoices - imposition of penalty u/r 26 of CER - HELD THAT:- Without receiving goods or supply of goods, the appellant has received invoices and also issued cenvatable invoices, facilitating M/s Reliance Cellulose Products Limited to avail fraudulent credit. The appellants having issued excise duty invoice without delivery of goods is, therefore, liable for penalty under Sub Rule 2 of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. There are no grounds to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner that the appellant is liable for penalty under Rule 26(2). However, the penalty of ₹ 22.00 lakhs imposed on the appellant is on the higher side - the imposition of fine of ₹ 5.00 lakhs would meet the ends of justice. Appeal allowed in part.
|