https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95119 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules was not supported by any prima facie finding that the appellants had acquired, possessed, concealed, transported, sold, purchased, or otherwise dealt with excisable goods known or believed to be liable to confiscation. The only recorded basis was that they had not shown themselves to be bona fide purchasers and had relied on fake purchase documents, which did not by itself satisfy the essential ingredients of Rule 209A. On that footing, a prima facie case was made out for waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal. en-us Tue, 21 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:53:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95119 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules was not supported by any prima facie finding that the appellants had acquired, possessed, concealed, transported, sold, purchased, or otherwise dealt with excisable goods known or believed to be liable to confiscation. The only recorded basis was that they had not shown themselves to be bona fide purchasers and had relied on fake purchase documents, which did not by itself satisfy the essential ingredients of Rule 209A. On that footing, a prima facie case was made out for waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95119