TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Challenge to Penalty under Central Excise Rules for Transporting Imported Goods</h1> <h3>Excellent Road Carriers Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vapi</h3> Excellent Road Carriers Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vapi - TMI Issues:Penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 for transportation of imported goods.Analysis:The appellant was penalized under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 for transporting imported goods. The appellant argued that Rule 26, which pertains to excisable goods, does not apply to imported goods. The Revenue, represented by the Superintendent, supported the impugned order. The Member (Judicial) carefully considered both arguments and examined the records. The penalty imposed was Rs. 2.5 Lacs for transporting imported goods from the port to a specific location. Rule 26 was cited, outlining penalties for dealing with excisable goods liable for confiscation. The definition of 'excisable goods' from the Central Excise Act, 1944 was also referenced, emphasizing goods subject to excise duty. The analysis continued by highlighting that Rule 26 penalties apply only to excisable goods subject to excise duty. Since the goods in question were imported, not excisable, the penalty under Rule 26 could not be imposed. Consequently, the impugned order was modified, setting aside the penalty and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by the Member (Judicial) Mr. Ramesh Nair.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
