https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50376 Admitted Central Excise violation justified a penalty, but the Tribunal reduced the firm's penalty from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 25,000 having regard to the facts and value of the goods. It also held that a separate penalty on the partner under Rule 209A was not sustainable, since in a partnership firm it was not legally necessary to treat the firm as distinct from the partner for penalty purposes. The penalty on the firm was therefore reduced, and the partner's penalty was set aside. en-us Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:14:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50376 Admitted Central Excise violation justified a penalty, but the Tribunal reduced the firm's penalty from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 25,000 having regard to the facts and value of the goods. It also held that a separate penalty on the partner under Rule 209A was not sustainable, since in a partnership firm it was not legally necessary to treat the firm as distinct from the partner for penalty purposes. The penalty on the firm was therefore reduced, and the partner's penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50376