TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 2117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HAT:- From the plain reading of the Rule 26, it is clear that merely for making bogus LRs, the action of the appellant does not fall as an offence under Rule 26. The rule 26 was subsequently amended from 01.03.2007 effective from 01.04.2007. Since the period involved is prior to the said amendment, the penalty under Rule 26 cannot be imposed only for issuance of bogus LRs. This issue is covered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in issuance of bogus LRs for transport of copper from Delhi to M/s Star Tubes Metals Pvt. Ltd, Waghodia in respect of the consignment which were not delivered to the assessee who avail the fraudulent cenvat credit, accordingly, penalty of Rs. 1 Lakh was imposed on the appellant under Ruler 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. None appeared for the appellant. 3. Ld. AR appearing for the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant does not fall as an offence under Rule 26. The rule 26 was subsequently amended from 01.03.2007 effective from 01.04.2007. Since the period involved is prior to the said amendment, the penalty under Rule 26 cannot be imposed only for issuance of bogus LRs. This issue is covered by the judgment of Hon ble Punjab High Court in case of Mini Steel Traders 2014 (309) ELT 404 (P H) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
