https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265912 Penalties on partners under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were examined in light of findings of wrong declarations, suppression of the manufacturing process, and misdeclaration of classification with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal noted that the earlier remand had limited the demand to the normal period of limitation and that the penalty on the partnership firm had already been reduced. In that context, the Tribunal held the partner-level penalties were excessive and reduced them to Rs. 50,000 each, modifying the penal liability accordingly. en-us Thu, 28 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 May 2016 12:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265912 Penalties on partners under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were examined in light of findings of wrong declarations, suppression of the manufacturing process, and misdeclaration of classification with intent to evade duty. The Tribunal noted that the earlier remand had limited the demand to the normal period of limitation and that the penalty on the partnership firm had already been reduced. In that context, the Tribunal held the partner-level penalties were excessive and reduced them to Rs. 50,000 each, modifying the penal liability accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265912