https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202534 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required actual possession of, or dealing with, excisable goods with knowledge or reason to believe that they were liable to confiscation. Mere issuance of invoices without movement or delivery of goods did not satisfy that requirement. The later introduction of Rule 26, which expressly covered invoice issuance without delivery, confirmed that such conduct was not within Rule 209A at the relevant time. The Tribunal's conclusion that penalty could not be imposed on these facts was upheld, and the assessees were relieved from penalty. en-us Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202534 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required actual possession of, or dealing with, excisable goods with knowledge or reason to believe that they were liable to confiscation. Mere issuance of invoices without movement or delivery of goods did not satisfy that requirement. The later introduction of Rule 26, which expressly covered invoice issuance without delivery, confirmed that such conduct was not within Rule 209A at the relevant time. The Tribunal's conclusion that penalty could not be imposed on these facts was upheld, and the assessees were relieved from penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202534