https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190238 The penalty imposed on the appellants under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, for facilitating fraudulent rebate of excise duty through bogus invoices was set aside. The Revenue's appeal against the low penalty led to an enhancement by the Commissioner (Appeals), which was challenged by the appellants. The core issue was the applicability of the penalty provision from 1.03.2007 onwards, which was found not to cover the alleged acts predating this date. Consequently, the penalties imposed were deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants. en-us Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 22:57:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190238 The penalty imposed on the appellants under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, for facilitating fraudulent rebate of excise duty through bogus invoices was set aside. The Revenue's appeal against the low penalty led to an enhancement by the Commissioner (Appeals), which was challenged by the appellants. The core issue was the applicability of the penalty provision from 1.03.2007 onwards, which was found not to cover the alleged acts predating this date. Consequently, the penalties imposed were deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190238