https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295370 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 5,000 imposed under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 for failing to renew the letter of undertaking (LUT) after exporting goods. The Tribunal found that there was no legal requirement for periodic renewal of the LUT as per relevant notifications and that the show cause notice did not mention the penalty under Rule 27, rendering its imposition illegal. Emphasizing the need for alignment between statutory provisions and supplementary instructions, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unjustified and unsustainable, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 29 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jun 2021 08:30:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295370 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 5,000 imposed under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 for failing to renew the letter of undertaking (LUT) after exporting goods. The Tribunal found that there was no legal requirement for periodic renewal of the LUT as per relevant notifications and that the show cause notice did not mention the penalty under Rule 27, rendering its imposition illegal. Emphasizing the need for alignment between statutory provisions and supplementary instructions, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unjustified and unsustainable, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295370