https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154923 The appellant challenged the penalty imposition under Section 11AC in the adjudication of a show-cause notice invoking the extended period of limitation for duty recovery on allegedly clandestinely removed finished goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the penalty to the extent of 25% under Section 11AC, with no further penalty amount deemed necessary. The appeal challenging the penalty imposition under Section 11AC was dismissed as no valid grounds were raised. Additionally, the penalty imposed on a director under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was deemed unsustainable due to lack of evidence of involvement in dealing with goods liable to confiscation, resulting in the allowance of the appeal. en-us Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Aug 2013 12:13:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154923 The appellant challenged the penalty imposition under Section 11AC in the adjudication of a show-cause notice invoking the extended period of limitation for duty recovery on allegedly clandestinely removed finished goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the penalty to the extent of 25% under Section 11AC, with no further penalty amount deemed necessary. The appeal challenging the penalty imposition under Section 11AC was dismissed as no valid grounds were raised. Additionally, the penalty imposed on a director under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was deemed unsustainable due to lack of evidence of involvement in dealing with goods liable to confiscation, resulting in the allowance of the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154923