https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116860 Penalty under Rule 209(bbb) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires proof of wilful, wrong, or incorrect particulars in the invoices, or equivalent culpable conduct such as collusion; suspicion alone is insufficient. On the facts, the dealer had purchased scrap under invoices and resold it in the ordinary course of trade, and there was no proof of collusion with the supplier or of any false invoicing. The deletion of penalty was therefore correct and the departmental challenge failed. en-us Tue, 06 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:24:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116860 Penalty under Rule 209(bbb) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires proof of wilful, wrong, or incorrect particulars in the invoices, or equivalent culpable conduct such as collusion; suspicion alone is insufficient. On the facts, the dealer had purchased scrap under invoices and resold it in the ordinary course of trade, and there was no proof of collusion with the supplier or of any false invoicing. The deletion of penalty was therefore correct and the departmental challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116860