https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208609 The appeals challenging penalties imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the penalties, emphasizing that penalties can be imposed based on knowledge or belief of goods' liability for confiscation, regardless of an actual confiscation order. The quantification of penalties was deemed appropriate due to appellants' active roles in evading duty. The Tribunal affirmed that the penalties were legally justified, considering the appellants' conduct in the evasion scheme. en-us Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208609 The appeals challenging penalties imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the penalties, emphasizing that penalties can be imposed based on knowledge or belief of goods' liability for confiscation, regardless of an actual confiscation order. The quantification of penalties was deemed appropriate due to appellants' active roles in evading duty. The Tribunal affirmed that the penalties were legally justified, considering the appellants' conduct in the evasion scheme. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208609