Personal penalty under Rule 209A cannot be imposed on a manufacturer's employee for acts done within official employment.

Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 applies only to a person who deals with excisable goods in the manner contemplated by the provision; it cannot be extended to impose a personal penalty on a manufacturer's employee for acts done within the course of employment absent an independent legal basis. As the employee had no separate role outside his official capacity, the personal penalty was held unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be invoked to impose a personal penalty on an employee of the manufacturer for acts done in the course of employment.

Analysis: Rule 209A was held to apply to a person who dealt with the excisable goods in the manner contemplated by the rule. The appellant was only an employee of BHEL and had no independent role as a person dealing with the goods outside his official capacity. The impugned order proceeded on an erroneous assumption that an employee could be penalised personally for the manufacturer's duty defaults, although no legal basis was shown for extending the penal provision to such a case.

Conclusion: Rule 209A could not be applied to the appellant, and the personal penalty imposed on him was unsustainable.

---