TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....medabad where under the present appellant was also made liable for penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for certain omissions and commissions will laid to evasion of Central Excise duty. The matter got adjudicated by impugned Order-In-Original dated 03.10.2012 where under Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 2,48,83,940/- was confirmed against M/s Shree. Rajshakti Automobiles, Ahmedabad and apart from imposition of penalty and penalties to another persons, a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- has also been imposed on the present appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant is before me against the above mentioned penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/-. 2. I have heard both the sides. The Learned Advocate appearing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....OF SERVICE TAX, AUDIT-I-2018 (362) E.L.T 894 (Tri.- Mumbai) * HOMAG INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. COMMR, OF C. EX., S.T. & BANGALORE-II-2017 (357) E.L.T 1194 (Tri.-Bang.) 2.1. I have also heard the learned departmental representative. Having heard both the sides, I find that appellant was having a registration with Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI-Pune) for production of vehicles in name of his firm namely Hakikat Auto Industries, Rajkot- Bhavnagar Highway Road, Chanvand, Amreli. He was also aware that manufacturer of the "Chhakkdo Rickshaw" cannot get their product registered with the RTO without ARAI certificate/registration. The appellant have facilitated registration of the "Chhakkdo Rickshaw" manufactured by M/s Shree Rajshakti ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of M/s Esspee Finance clearly indicates that they every reason to believe that the goods cleared without payment of duties and on fake invoices, were liable for confiscation. They acquired possession of, or were concerned in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing seling or purchasing and dealt with the excisable goods, which were liable to confiscation. The ratio of the cases cited are not applicable inasmuch as in the case of Associated Plastics & Rayond [2007 (215) ELT 309] and M / s Carpenter Classic Exim (2006 (200) ELT 593] relates to imposition of personal penalty on emplyees under the Customs Act and in the case of Vinod Kumar (2006 (199) ELT 705, penalty was held to be not sustainable in view of the fact that intent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s specified therein or abets in making such invoice; or (ii) any other document or abets in making such document, on the basis of which the user of said invoice or document is likely to take or has taken any ineligible benefit under the Act or the rules made there under like claiming of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 or refund, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the amount of such benefit or five thousand rupees, whichever is greater.]" 3.1 From the facts of the matter and as per the provision of the Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, it can easily be inferred that the appellant though may not have physically handle the transportation, sale, purchase of "Chhakkdo Rickshaw" which was cleared without pay....