No penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rule if appellant not involved in clandestine production/removal

Rahul Chauhan Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Allahabad)

We find that this appellant is neither a Director nor an employee of M/s Musk Tobacco. Further, he is not connected either as a supplier or buyer of finished goods. Only he has provided space in his residence to store the documents of M/s Musk Tobacco, without any knowledge that this relates to clandestine production and removal by M/s Musk Tobacco. Further, this appellant has given a cogent explanation with regard to the documents, registers, loose papers etc. found at his r

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.