Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 6 - CESTAT AHMEDABADPenalty u/r 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - appellant was Director during relevant period - denial of benefit of exemption notification for Magnesium Sulphate which was being manufactured by the main appellant firm - HELD THAT:- Since the demand of the duty has already been settled under SVLDRS Scheme and there is no cause for imposition of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the director of the company who has been a paid employee and issue of the demand was primarily of interpretation of the exemption notification. The decision in case of SHRI V.K. AGGARWAL AND SHRI J.K. AGGARWAL VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI [2023 (9) TMI 178 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] followed where it was held that The judgements so referred clearly says that when the demand of duty has been settled under SVLDR Scheme, the imposition of penalty would fail on simple ground that if the appellants had applied under the said scheme, they would have paid 'nil' duty, in view of the relief available to them under Section 124(1)(b) of the Finance Act. Appeal allowed.
|