Tribunal waives penalty under Central Excise Rules, finding no proposal for confiscation.

The Tribunal granted relief to the appellant by waiving the penalty imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Tribunal found that the imposition of the penalty was not sustainable as there was no proposal or finding indicating that the goods were liable for confiscation. Therefore, the recovery of the penalty was stayed during the appeal process, providing the appellant with a favorable outcome against the penalty for suppression of production and clandestine removal.

---

---

Issues:
Imposition of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the Managing Director for suppression of production and clandestine removal.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Imposition of Penalty:
The appeal and stay application were filed against the penalty imposed on the Managing Director of the company for an amount of Rs. 5,03,112 under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The penalty was affirmed in the Order-in-Appeal, which confirmed a duty demand along with interest and an equivalent penalty on the company. The appellant, who admitted the case of suppression of production and clandestine removal, was the Managing Director during the investigation. The main appellant had already paid the duty liability, interest, and 25% of the penalty.

2. Legal Consideration:
In the absence of representation from the appellant, the Addl. Commissioner reiterated the findings of the lower appellate authority. However, upon reviewing the submissions, the Tribunal noted that Rule 26 allows for the imposition of penalty if the person dealt with goods known to be liable for confiscation. In this case, there was no proposal or finding in the show-cause notice or the adjudication order indicating that the goods were liable for confiscation. Therefore, the imposition of penalty under Rule 26 could not be sustained without such a proposal or finding.

3. Judgment and Relief:
Considering the legal provisions and the lack of evidence regarding the liability of the goods for confiscation, the Tribunal granted a waiver from the pre-deposit of the penalty imposed on the appellant. The recovery of the penalty was stayed during the pendency of the appeal. The decision was dictated and pronounced in court, providing relief to the appellant against the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues surrounding the imposition of penalties under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the Managing Director for alleged suppression of production and clandestine removal, and the legal considerations leading to the relief granted by the Tribunal.

---