2019 (11) TMI 1852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Respondent: Mr. Bhasha Ram, Authorised Representative. ORDER PER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order imposing penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was involved in the activity of undervaluation and issued parallel invoice to M/s A.H. Alloys and enabling them to avail inadmissible Cenva....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2007 (220) ELT 492 (Tri.); therefore, no penalty can be imposed on the appellant as M/s A.H. Alloys has already got their case settled before the Settlement Commission. 4. On the other hand, the ld. A.R. opposes the contention of the ld. Counsel and submits that as their case has been rejected by the Settlement Commission, therefore they are not entitled for any immunity. 5. Heard the partie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o-noticees may be covered for immunity based on ratio followed in the case of S.K. Colombowala (supra). However, on examination, if it is found that any of conoticees, not approaching Settlement Commission, committed offence distinct and liable for penalty to that offence, then automatic immunity not to be extended to such co-noticee." Admittedly, the appellant has approached to the Settlement ....