https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448051 The court found that M/s. Voltas Ltd. was not liable for the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as their involvement with M/s. St. Roch Enterprises was strictly commercial, and they were unaware of the manufacturer's non-payment of excise duty. The Revenue failed to establish the appellant's role in the duty evasion. Consequently, the penalty imposed on M/s. Voltas Ltd. was set aside, with the court ruling in favor of the appellant. en-us Wed, 10 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448051 The court found that M/s. Voltas Ltd. was not liable for the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as their involvement with M/s. St. Roch Enterprises was strictly commercial, and they were unaware of the manufacturer's non-payment of excise duty. The Revenue failed to establish the appellant's role in the duty evasion. Consequently, the penalty imposed on M/s. Voltas Ltd. was set aside, with the court ruling in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448051