Tribunal Overturns Penalties for Appellants in Excise Rule 26 Case

The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules on five appellants as they were found not directly involved in activities warranting penalties. The duty demand and penalty on M/s Musk Tobacco were not under consideration in these appeals due to procedural reasons. The Tribunal questioned the reliability of evidence based on third-party records and statements, particularly noting the lack of witness examination. Penalties on various individuals associated with M/s Musk Tobacco were also set aside due to lack of evidence of their involvement in clandestine activities. The issue of jurisdiction/power of the Additional Director General, DGCEI to issue show cause notice remained unresolved.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Imposition of penalties under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules on five appellants.
2. Confirmation of duty demand and penalty on M/s Musk Tobacco.
3. Validity of evidence based on third-party records and statements.
4. Involvement of Directors and other individuals in the clandestine activities of M/s Musk Tobacco.
5. Jurisdiction/power of the Additional Director General, DGCEI to issue show cause notice.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Imposition of Penalties under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules on Five Appellants:
The Tribunal examined whether penalties imposed on the five appellants under Rule 26 were justified. Rule 26 penalizes individuals involved in handling excisable goods liable to confiscation. The Tribunal found that none of the appellants were directly involved in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling, or purchasing excisable goods knowing they were liable to confiscation. Consequently, the penalties imposed on all five appellants were set aside.

2. Confirmation of Duty Demand and Penalty on M/s Musk Tobacco:
The duty demand and penalty on M/s Musk Tobacco had already reached finality as the appeal was dismissed for not making a pre-deposit. The Tribunal noted that the issue concerning M/s Musk Tobacco was not under consideration in these appeals, focusing solely on the penalties imposed on the five appellants.

3. Validity of Evidence Based on Third-Party Records and Statements:
The Tribunal observed that the case was primarily based on statements and records resumed from third parties not directly connected with M/s Musk Tobacco. The Tribunal emphasized that such evidence lacks reliability, especially since the adjudicating authority did not examine any witnesses during the proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal questioned the evidentiary value of these third-party records and statements.

4. Involvement of Directors and Other Individuals in the Clandestine Activities of M/s Musk Tobacco:
- Rahul Chauhan (Director): The Tribunal found no evidence of his involvement in any clandestine activities and set aside the penalty imposed on him.
- Bushra Gupta and Megha Gupta (Directors): Both had resigned from their directorship before the commencement of cigarette production. The Tribunal concluded they had no role in the alleged activities and set aside the penalties.
- Vidyut Gupta: Although he provided infrastructure and machinery for M/s Musk Tobacco, he was not involved in day-to-day operations or clandestine activities. The Tribunal set aside the penalty.
- Shankar Pal Pradhan: He was not a director or employee of M/s Musk Tobacco and only provided space for storing documents without knowledge of any clandestine activities. The Tribunal set aside the penalty on him as well.

5. Jurisdiction/Power of the Additional Director General, DGCEI to Issue Show Cause Notice:
The Tribunal left the issue of jurisdiction/power of the Additional Director General, DGCEI to issue the show cause notice open, without making any determination on this point.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals of all five appellants and set aside the penalties imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal also disposed of the stay applications accordingly. The judgment was pronounced on 25.08.2022.

---