https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442556 Penalty on co-noticee directors did not survive once the main noticee obtained discharge under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The Tribunal noted that the scheme, read with Section 124(1) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 and the binding departmental circular, treated the underlying liability as settled on issuance of the discharge certificate. It held that co-noticee cases were covered where the main duty demand stood discharged, and that any failure by the co-noticees to separately opt for the scheme was only a procedural lapse. The penalty was therefore set aside. en-us Tue, 29 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 17:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442556 Penalty on co-noticee directors did not survive once the main noticee obtained discharge under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The Tribunal noted that the scheme, read with Section 124(1) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 and the binding departmental circular, treated the underlying liability as settled on issuance of the discharge certificate. It held that co-noticee cases were covered where the main duty demand stood discharged, and that any failure by the co-noticees to separately opt for the scheme was only a procedural lapse. The penalty was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442556