https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118483 Where the foundational allegation of clandestine manufacture or duty evasion failed, the consequential penalty under Rule 209A for alleged abetment also could not stand. CESTAT further held that a penalty cannot be sustained or enhanced in de novo proceedings on a new basis that was not part of the show cause notice, because such a ground lies outside the scope of the original proceedings. On that reasoning, the penalties were found unsustainable and were set aside. en-us Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2012 18:46:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118483 Where the foundational allegation of clandestine manufacture or duty evasion failed, the consequential penalty under Rule 209A for alleged abetment also could not stand. CESTAT further held that a penalty cannot be sustained or enhanced in de novo proceedings on a new basis that was not part of the show cause notice, because such a ground lies outside the scope of the original proceedings. On that reasoning, the penalties were found unsustainable and were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118483