https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245974 Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 was held unsustainable where the show cause notice did not identify the precise clause or specific nature of breach alleged. The notice mentioned non-compliance with warehousing provisions under Rule 20, but it failed to set out the particular Rule 25 charge, depriving the assessee of clear notice and an effective opportunity to defend. As penalty under excise law is independent of duty liability, a definite factual and legal foundation was required before imposition. In the absence of such foundation, the penalty was set aside. en-us Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Apr 2014 11:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245974 Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 was held unsustainable where the show cause notice did not identify the precise clause or specific nature of breach alleged. The notice mentioned non-compliance with warehousing provisions under Rule 20, but it failed to set out the particular Rule 25 charge, depriving the assessee of clear notice and an effective opportunity to defend. As penalty under excise law is independent of duty liability, a definite factual and legal foundation was required before imposition. In the absence of such foundation, the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245974