https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115602 Penalty under Rule 209A cannot stand where the underlying duty demand against the main noticee has already been set aside as time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was penalised for allegedly facilitating evasion by the principal purchaser, but the duty demand itself no longer survived. As the penalty was dependent on the existence of a valid and enforceable duty demand, the absence of such demand removed the legal foundation for penal liability. The penalty was therefore held unsustainable and set aside. en-us Wed, 31 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 May 2012 13:20:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115602 Penalty under Rule 209A cannot stand where the underlying duty demand against the main noticee has already been set aside as time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was penalised for allegedly facilitating evasion by the principal purchaser, but the duty demand itself no longer survived. As the penalty was dependent on the existence of a valid and enforceable duty demand, the absence of such demand removed the legal foundation for penal liability. The penalty was therefore held unsustainable and set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115602