Personal penalty barred for Cenvat credit lapse where genuine documents were misattributed and no fraud was shown.

Personal penalty is not warranted where an employee is linked to an alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat credit on a genuine bill of entry that stood in the name of a different unit of the same entity. The dispute was treated as an issue of incorrect attribution and interpretation of the Cenvat credit framework, not as use of a forged or inherently invalid document. In the absence of any finding of deliberate wrongdoing, intentional fraud, or misuse of a fabricated document, personal penalty was held to be unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether personal penalty could be imposed on an employee for alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat credit by the company on a bill of entry not standing in the company's name.

Analysis: The credit dispute arose from use of a bill of entry bearing the name of a different unit of the same entity. The document was not forged or inherently invalid, and the lapse was treated as one of incorrect attribution of the document rather than intentional fraud. The controversy was regarded as one of interpretation of the Cenvat credit framework, and the employee's conduct was not shown to involve deliberate wrongdoing so as to attract personal penalty.

Conclusion: Personal penalty on the employee was not sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Personal penalty is not warranted where the alleged irregularity concerns an interpretational lapse in availing credit on a genuine document and there is no finding of intentional fraud or use of a forged or invalid document.

---