Order Date – 21 July 2022

Facts – 

• The Appellant, M/s. Santhi Steels, received a Show Cause Notice dated 07.12.2011 was issued to five co-noticees.
• Since the Revenue had suspected that one of the co-noticees namely had wrongly availed CENVAT Credit and that the appellant had abetted/aided, planned and conspired with other co-noticees in the preparation of invalid documents, resulting in the above wrongful availment of CENVAT Credit, whereby the penalty imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
• Aggrieved the appellant filed an appeal.

Issue – 

• Whether the said penalty sustained in the impugned order is correct or not?

Order – 

• The Tribunal observed that when a statutory notice was issued, it was incumbent upon the appellant to at least offer an explanation to clear the doubts pointed out. The appellant, however, without bothering to do so, has only contended that the documents / evidences relied upon by the Revenue were vague, etc.
• Hence, the fact remains that had one of the co-noticees wrongfully availed CENVAT Credit and the appellant being “any person” who has abetted in making such documents that helped them in availing such wrongful CENVAT Credit, cannot escape from the rigours of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
• Therefore, the Order is upheld and appeal is dismissed.