https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363466 The Tribunal set aside the denial of CENVAT Credit under Rule 14, as the appellants did not fall under the categories mentioned in the rule. The confiscation of goods under Section 119 was deemed improper due to lack of evidence that other goods were used to conceal the offending goods. Penalties under Rule 26 were reduced from &8377; 1,50,248 to &8377; 50,000 each, considering the buyer did not benefit from the incorrect invoices. The Tribunal disposed of the appeals by overturning the denial of CENVAT Credit and redemption fine, while reducing the penalties imposed on the appellants. en-us Wed, 30 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:12:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363466 The Tribunal set aside the denial of CENVAT Credit under Rule 14, as the appellants did not fall under the categories mentioned in the rule. The confiscation of goods under Section 119 was deemed improper due to lack of evidence that other goods were used to conceal the offending goods. Penalties under Rule 26 were reduced from &8377; 1,50,248 to &8377; 50,000 each, considering the buyer did not benefit from the incorrect invoices. The Tribunal disposed of the appeals by overturning the denial of CENVAT Credit and redemption fine, while reducing the penalties imposed on the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363466