https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250066 Separate penalty on a partner of a partnership concern was upheld where the partner had clear knowledge of the wrongful availment of credit and was found to have actively ated in the fraudulent and clandestine excise activity. Applying earlier binding precedent, the tribunal treated a partner who is a party to the fraud as independently liable, so the fact that penalty had already been imposed on the firm did not bar action against the partner. The earlier orders exonerating the partner were held unsustainable, and penalty under Rule 209A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was confirmed. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Aug 2014 09:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250066 Separate penalty on a partner of a partnership concern was upheld where the partner had clear knowledge of the wrongful availment of credit and was found to have actively ated in the fraudulent and clandestine excise activity. Applying earlier binding precedent, the tribunal treated a partner who is a party to the fraud as independently liable, so the fact that penalty had already been imposed on the firm did not bar action against the partner. The earlier orders exonerating the partner were held unsustainable, and penalty under Rule 209A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was confirmed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250066