https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421061 The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under Rule 26(1) of CER, 2002 on the broker for involvement in transporting and dealing with excisable goods without proper documentation or duty payment. However, the penalty was reduced to Rs. 50,000 from the original amount. The Tribunal found the penalty justified based on evidence including confessional statements and documents recovered from the broker, noting the manufacturer did not dispute the Central Excise Duty demand related to the broker's actions. The appeal was partly allowed, with the decision announced on 12.04.2022. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:12:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421061 The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under Rule 26(1) of CER, 2002 on the broker for involvement in transporting and dealing with excisable goods without proper documentation or duty payment. However, the penalty was reduced to Rs. 50,000 from the original amount. The Tribunal found the penalty justified based on evidence including confessional statements and documents recovered from the broker, noting the manufacturer did not dispute the Central Excise Duty demand related to the broker's actions. The appeal was partly allowed, with the decision announced on 12.04.2022. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421061