https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122879 Rule 26 penalty exposure for companies was challenged on the ground that such penalty applies only to natural persons. The Tribunal distinguished a High Court ruling under a different State statute and relied on prior decisions under the Central Excise Rules to hold, for stay purposes, that the appellants had shown a prima facie case against imposition of the penalties. On that basis, waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery were granted in respect of the Rule 26 penalties. en-us Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:18:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122879 Rule 26 penalty exposure for companies was challenged on the ground that such penalty applies only to natural persons. The Tribunal distinguished a High Court ruling under a different State statute and relied on prior decisions under the Central Excise Rules to hold, for stay purposes, that the appellants had shown a prima facie case against imposition of the penalties. On that basis, waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery were granted in respect of the Rule 26 penalties. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122879