Personal penalty under Rule 209A needs direct involvement with offending goods; managerial designation alone is not enough.

Personal penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires material showing that the person was instrumental in, or otherwise concerned with, possession, concealment, removal, sale, purchase or other dealing with goods liable to confiscation. A mere designation as Managing Director is insufficient where the show cause notice contains no allegation that he directed non-accountal of finished goods or personally dealt with the goods. On the recorded facts, the Tribunal held that the penalty could not be sustained against the Managing Director and the Department's appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether personal penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be sustained against the Managing Director in the absence of any allegation that he was instrumental in, or concerned with, the non-accountal of excisable goods in the statutory records.

Analysis: The penalty was imposed on the Managing Director because excess stock of steel tubes and pipes was found and the goods were alleged to be unaccounted in the RG-1 register. The Tribunal noted that the show cause notice did not contain any allegation that the respondent was instrumental in directing staff to omit accountal of finished goods, or that he personally dealt with the goods in any manner attracting Rule 209A. It was further observed that mere responsibility as Managing Director, without material showing possession, concealment, removal, sale, purchase, or other dealing with goods known to be liable to confiscation, was insufficient for penalty under the rule.

Conclusion: Personal penalty under Rule 209A could not be sustained against the Managing Director on the facts recorded, and the Department's appeal failed.

---