https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202226 Penalty for alleged contravention of Rule 51A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable because the alleged movement of ten power press machines into the factory was not proved by evidence. The only foundation for the penalty was the assertion that the machines were brought into the factory and then sold, but no material established that they had in fact entered the premises. On those facts, the trading transaction alone could not support a finding of contravention, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202226 Penalty for alleged contravention of Rule 51A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable because the alleged movement of ten power press machines into the factory was not proved by evidence. The only foundation for the penalty was the assertion that the machines were brought into the factory and then sold, but no material established that they had in fact entered the premises. On those facts, the trading transaction alone could not support a finding of contravention, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202226