https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332852 Penalty under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 could not be sustained where it was founded solely on breach of Rule 8(3A), because that rule had already been declared unconstitutional by the High Court. Once the underlying provision ceased to stand, the alleged contravention could not support penal action. The Tribunal therefore set aside the penalty and granted consequential relief to the assessee. The explanation based on financial difficulty and later payment of duty and interest was not treated as the basis for the decision. en-us Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:48:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332852 Penalty under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 could not be sustained where it was founded solely on breach of Rule 8(3A), because that rule had already been declared unconstitutional by the High Court. Once the underlying provision ceased to stand, the alleged contravention could not support penal action. The Tribunal therefore set aside the penalty and granted consequential relief to the assessee. The explanation based on financial difficulty and later payment of duty and interest was not treated as the basis for the decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332852