https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54059 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was sustained against the individual because the authorities found that he had conscious knowledge of the seized ball bearings and knowingly dealt with them as non-duty paid excisable goods. Penalty was set aside against the transport corporation because a juristic entity cannot be fastened with liability under Rule 209A merely on an employee's act in the ordinary course of business without proof of the corporation's own knowledge or conscious involvement. The decision therefore upheld the personal penalty while granting relief to the corporation. en-us Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Oct 2010 16:30:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54059 Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was sustained against the individual because the authorities found that he had conscious knowledge of the seized ball bearings and knowingly dealt with them as non-duty paid excisable goods. Penalty was set aside against the transport corporation because a juristic entity cannot be fastened with liability under Rule 209A merely on an employee's act in the ordinary course of business without proof of the corporation's own knowledge or conscious involvement. The decision therefore upheld the personal penalty while granting relief to the corporation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54059