https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382793 The appeal was successful as the court set aside the penalty imposed on the Appellant, who was the Authorized Signatory of a company. The court found that there was a lack of evidence to support the duty demand under the Finance Act, 1994, relating to the transportation of extra iron ore by related entities. Consequently, the penalty on all manufacturing units, including the individual case of the Appellant, was deemed unsustainable. The court revoked the penalty and allowed the appeal, ultimately setting aside the impugned order entirely. en-us Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jul 2019 06:12:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382793 The appeal was successful as the court set aside the penalty imposed on the Appellant, who was the Authorized Signatory of a company. The court found that there was a lack of evidence to support the duty demand under the Finance Act, 1994, relating to the transportation of extra iron ore by related entities. Consequently, the penalty on all manufacturing units, including the individual case of the Appellant, was deemed unsustainable. The court revoked the penalty and allowed the appeal, ultimately setting aside the impugned order entirely. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382793