https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790750 Penalties under Rule 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were found unsustainable where the suppliers had cleared goods against invoices on payment of duty and no corroborative evidence showed their abetment in fraudulent CENVAT credit availment or diversion of goods. The buyer's diversion of goods and alleged fake invoicing could not be attributed to the suppliers, and there was no independent basis for penal action against them. The main noticee's settlement under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme also weighed against continuation of the penalty proceedings, and the penalties were set aside. en-us Wed, 04 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2026 07:19:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790750 Penalties under Rule 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were found unsustainable where the suppliers had cleared goods against invoices on payment of duty and no corroborative evidence showed their abetment in fraudulent CENVAT credit availment or diversion of goods. The buyer's diversion of goods and alleged fake invoicing could not be attributed to the suppliers, and there was no independent basis for penal action against them. The main noticee's settlement under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme also weighed against continuation of the penalty proceedings, and the penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790750