Rule 26 of CE Rules, 2002 – Penalty not sustainable where actual involvement of parties in clandestine removal of goods not established – HC

Brief of the Case

Delhi High Court held In the case of Rakesh Kumar Garg & others vs. CCE that the SCN which proposed the penalty would have to make out a case for how Rule 26 is attracted. In the present case, apart from merely stating that the three Appellants were in control of the affairs of the company engaged in manufacturing pan masala and gutka of ‘Rajdarbar’ brand, there is nothing in the SCN which points to how they were actually involved in the transporting, removing or cleari

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