TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom 1.1.1995 to 3.8.1995 i.e., during the period when he was not in the services of the company. On going through the findings of the Commissioner for imposition of penalty upon him, it is seen that the penalty stand imposed on the sole ground that he was the General Manager of the company and as such, was responsible for production and clearance of the goods without payment of duty. Apart from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs imposed under Rule 209A of Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that this is a third round of litigation. It is the submission that in the first round of proceedings, the adjudicating authority imposed penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- by Order-in-Original No.12/2006 dated 12.12.2006. It is the submission that the Tribunal set aside th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y originally imposed upon the appellant cannot be enhanced when the matter was remanded to him on the appeal filed by the appellant. The original penalty imposed was never challenged by the Revenue and the appellant cannot be put to a more disadvantageous position than the one he was in, at the time of the original adjudication, with which he was aggrieved with. 4.1 As regards the imposition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was the General Manager for a limited period, cannot make him liable to penalty under Rule 209A unless there is evidence to show that such clandestine activity was being carried out with his knowledge and consent and under his instructions. As such, in the absence of any evidence, I find no reasons to impose penalty upon him. The same is accordingly set aside and the appeal is allowed with conseq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
