Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear ...

Penalties u/r 26 Require Proof of Intent or Knowledge About Excisable Goods for Justification.

June 22, 2021

Case Laws Central Excise AT

Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear that unless and until there is sufficient evidence about the mens area/ intent on the part of the appellant which prove that he knew or had reason to believe that excisable goods with which he is involved, he is transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with such excisable goods, are liable for confiscation, he cannot be penalised under Rule 26. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear ...

Penalties u/r 26 Require Proof of Intent or Knowledge About Excisable Goods for Justification.

June 22, 2021

Case Laws Central Excise AT

You may also like:

Levy of penalty u/r 26 - Personal penalty for abatement in evasion of duty - a plain reading of Rule 26 indicates that imposition of the penalty therein is not tied to a...

Clandestine removal of excisable goods - Penalty u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 imposed on Managing Director. Appellant challenged Order upholding penalty without...

Penalty under rule 26 of the CER, 2002 can be imposed on a person only when it is proved beyond doubt that the person dealing with excisable goods knew or had reason to...

Penalty imposed u/s 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 for alleged abetment of illegal export by arranging lorries. Lack of admissible evidence showing knowledge of goods...

Levy of penalty - the penalty under Section 26 is inextricably linked to the confiscation of goods as long as there is no confiscation of the goods ordered that there...

Penalty imposed u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules 2002 set aside due to violation of principles of natural justice and lack of evidence. Department's case based solely on...

Levy of penalty personal penalty on Broker u/r 26 of CER - abetment in availment of inadmissible CENVAT Credit - From the statements it has been proved beyond any doubt...

Penalty under Rule 26 and u/s 11AC - Personal penalty on Director, transporter and other persons - Clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods - levy of penalty...

The High Court quashed penalty u/s E-Way Bill violation, classifying goods as ODC due to speed without intent to evade tax. Relying on precedent, mens rea is essential...

Levy of penalty on Broker for abetment - penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules cannot be levied - It have nowhere been found that the appellants have acquired...

Reversal of CENVAT Credit - removal of capital goods as such - power plant - Rule 3(5A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - The sale of goods or transfer of ownership of the...

The appellant was issued penalty u/r 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, alleging that second stage dealers based in Jaipur were issuing cenvatable invoices to the main...

Levy of penalty under Rule 25 cannot be imposed upon the main appellant for goods not manufactured by him - however penalty on director under Rule 26 confirmed - AT

Penalty - Bogus invoice issued without selling the goods – penalty would be attracted under Rule 25 (1) (d) as well as Rule 26(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - AT

The case involved a challenge to a penalty imposed u/s 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Acts. The court held that without proof of intent to evade tax, such penalties...

Quick Updates: