https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119992 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires proof that the person dealt with excisable goods knowing or believing that they were liable to confiscation. On the record, there was no statement or independent evidence showing that the appellants knew the fabrics had been cleared without duty, and purchase on commercial invoices alone did not establish the necessary awareness. There was also no material showing benefit from clandestine removal or any legal duty to insist on Central Excise invoices in the circumstances. The penalty was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:16:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119992 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires proof that the person dealt with excisable goods knowing or believing that they were liable to confiscation. On the record, there was no statement or independent evidence showing that the appellants knew the fabrics had been cleared without duty, and purchase on commercial invoices alone did not establish the necessary awareness. There was also no material showing benefit from clandestine removal or any legal duty to insist on Central Excise invoices in the circumstances. The penalty was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119992