2017 (1) TMI 368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The Appeal No.E/55622/2013 has been filed by the appellant against the impugned order imposing penalty of Rs. 10 lakh under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the allegation that the appellant has not supplied the inputs alongwith invoices issued to the principal manufacturer. Therefore, the penalty is imposed under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lty is not imposable on the appellant. To support his contention, he relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Flex Industries Ltd. vs.CCE-2006 (211) ELT 479 (Tri.-Del.) and in the case of Duggar Fiber Pvt.Ltd. vs. CCE & ST -20015 (322) ELT 763 (Tri.-Del.). He, therefore, prayed that for the period where invoices issued prior to 1.3.2007, the penalty is not imposable on the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the appellants. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High court in the case of M S Metals vs. CCE-2014 (309) ELT 241 (P&H) wherein it has been held that although for the period prior to 1.3.2007, Rule 26(2) was not in statute book, in such cases in spite of non applicability of Rule 26(2) for the period prior to 1-3-2007, penalty can be imposed under Rule 25(1)(d) and 26....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... can be imposed under Rule 25(1)(d) and 26(1) of the Central Excise Rules. 8. I have gone through the show cause notice as well as the adjudication order, there is no such proposal to impose penalty on the appellant under Rule 25(1) (d) and Rule 26 (1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The show case notice proposed to impose penalty under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Hon'ble High ....