https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210229 Penalty on an authorised signatory and accountant was sustained where the evidence showed active involvement in procurement and handling of raw materials, mixing operations, and awareness of clearances made with and without bills, rather than mere salaried employment. The finding of knowing participation in suppression of production and clandestine removal was therefore upheld as reasonable under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. However, taking note of reductions already granted to co-noticees and the overall circumstances, the penalty was moderated. en-us Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210229 Penalty on an authorised signatory and accountant was sustained where the evidence showed active involvement in procurement and handling of raw materials, mixing operations, and awareness of clearances made with and without bills, rather than mere salaried employment. The finding of knowing participation in suppression of production and clandestine removal was therefore upheld as reasonable under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. However, taking note of reductions already granted to co-noticees and the overall circumstances, the penalty was moderated. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210229