https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123856 The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad involved a penalty imposed on the proprietor of a trading unit. The duty demand against the trading unit was not confirmed, leading to the appeal's allowance. However, the penalty on the proprietor was upheld under Rule 209A. The judge opined that the penalty on the proprietor should have been set aside, similar to the trading unit. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing relief to the appellant. en-us Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:55:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123856 The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad involved a penalty imposed on the proprietor of a trading unit. The duty demand against the trading unit was not confirmed, leading to the appeal's allowance. However, the penalty on the proprietor was upheld under Rule 209A. The judge opined that the penalty on the proprietor should have been set aside, similar to the trading unit. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123856