Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 768 - CESTAT AHMEDABADLevy of penalty under Rule 26(2)(i) of CER, 2002 - allegation is that these appellants have facilitated the fraudulent availment of Cenvat Credit to M./s Archon - HELD THAT:- It is clear that as regard Balaji Logistics they have issued blank LRs, which were used for issuing cenvatable invoices without supply of the goods. In respect of similarly placed appellant SAMIR TRANSPORT COMPANY AND SB ROADLINES VERSUS C.C.E. & S.T. -AHMEDABAD-III [2022 (12) TMI 126 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], this Tribunal has upheld the penalty vide order No. A/11313-11314/2022 dated 31.10.2011, therefore, in this case also applying the same ratio penalty is sustainable and appeals are liable to be dismissed. Therefore, in the present case also the appellant was rightly imposed the penalty under Rule, 26(2)(i). As regard Topline Switchgear P Ltd and Riddhi Steel & Tube Ltd., as per the facts discussed by the Adjudicating Authority, it was found that only invoices were issued and no goods were supplied. Therefore, it is establish that all the three appellants have helped M./s Archon for availing the fraudulent Cenvat credit. Accordingly, there are no infirmity in the impugned order imposing penalty under Rule, 26(2)(i) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Penalties upheld - appeal dismissed.
|