https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331058 Penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on a partner for alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat credit by a partnership firm was found excessive on the facts. The firm had already reversed the entire credit after investigation and did not contest the demand, while the appellant's statement did not amount to a clear admission of deliberate misconduct. The record showed some culpability, but the surrounding circumstances did not justify sustaining the full penalty, so it was reduced and partial relief was granted. en-us Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2016 12:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331058 Penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on a partner for alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat credit by a partnership firm was found excessive on the facts. The firm had already reversed the entire credit after investigation and did not contest the demand, while the appellant's statement did not amount to a clear admission of deliberate misconduct. The record showed some culpability, but the surrounding circumstances did not justify sustaining the full penalty, so it was reduced and partial relief was granted. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331058