https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788872 Settlement of the principal noticee under SVLDRS does not automatically extinguish the liability of co-noticees; each noticee must independently seek and qualify for settlement. On the facts, the Tribunal treated the appellant's separate role in issuing bogus LRs and facilitating diversion of goods, supported by admissions and documentary evidence, as sufficient to sustain abetment-based penalty for fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit under the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appeal was dismissed, confirming that co-noticee liability turns on independent evidence and not merely on the main party's settlement. en-us Fri, 20 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788872 Settlement of the principal noticee under SVLDRS does not automatically extinguish the liability of co-noticees; each noticee must independently seek and qualify for settlement. On the facts, the Tribunal treated the appellant's separate role in issuing bogus LRs and facilitating diversion of goods, supported by admissions and documentary evidence, as sufficient to sustain abetment-based penalty for fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit under the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appeal was dismissed, confirming that co-noticee liability turns on independent evidence and not merely on the main party's settlement. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788872