https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345216 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the evidentiary foundation was vague and unsubstantiated. The Tribunal also noted that the adjudication was vitiated by non-compliance with Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, because witnesses were not produced for examination and cross-examination. Applying the same reasoning as in the connected matter, the Tribunal concluded that the basis for imposing penalty on the appellant could not survive and set aside the penalty. en-us Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jul 2017 07:05:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345216 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the evidentiary foundation was vague and unsubstantiated. The Tribunal also noted that the adjudication was vitiated by non-compliance with Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, because witnesses were not produced for examination and cross-examination. Applying the same reasoning as in the connected matter, the Tribunal concluded that the basis for imposing penalty on the appellant could not survive and set aside the penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345216