Penalty unsustainable after pre-notice duty payment and absence of confiscation basis for Rule 26.

Penalty was found unsustainable where duty had already been paid before issue of the show cause notice, because the penalty proceeding could not survive on those facts. Penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was also held inapplicable when no confiscation of goods was proposed, since that factual basis was necessary for invoking the rule. The rectification application clarified that the entire penalty action was not maintainable on the recorded facts, and the penalty relief stood confirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty was leviable where duty had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice and no confiscation of goods was proposed, including penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

Analysis: The duty had been paid before the show cause notice was issued. In such a situation, the penalty proceeding could not survive, and penalty was not leviable under the general penalty provisions relied upon in the matter. The order also accepted that penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 could not be sustained when there was no proposal for confiscation of goods, since that ground was necessary for invoking the rule in the facts of the case.

Conclusion: Penalty was held to be not leviable, including under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

Final Conclusion: The rectification application resulted in clarification that the entire penalty action was unsustainable on the facts recorded, and the appeal-related penalty relief stood confirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty is paid before issuance of the show cause notice, and the factual basis for invoking Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is absent for want of confiscability of goods, penalty cannot be sustained.

---