Suppression and misdeclaration in DTA clearances triggered interest and penalty, with no reduced-penalty relief available.

Incorrect declarations in DTA clearances were treated as suppression of a material fact where invoices categorically stated that no imported raw material had been used, but the investigation showed otherwise. The Tribunal noted that the officers' statements were not retracted and the record did not support the plea that Customs countersignature amounted to acceptance of the declaration. On that basis, suppression and misdeclaration with intent to evade duty were established, so interest under Section 11AB and penalty under Section 11AC were attracted. Payment of duty before the show cause notice did not eliminate liability, and the first proviso to Section 11AC was held inapplicable because interest had not been paid within the stipulated period.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was liable to interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for DTA clearances made on the basis of incorrect declarations, and whether the benefit of the first proviso to Section 11AC was available.

Analysis: The differential duty dispute had already been settled against the assessee, and the remaining question was whether the material fact regarding use of imported raw material had been suppressed or misdeclared with intent to evade duty. The invoices contained a categorical declaration that no imported raw material had been used while the investigation showed otherwise; the statements recorded from the assessee's officers were not retracted. The plea that countersignature of the invoices by a Customs officer amounted to acceptance of the declaration was not supported by the record. The Tribunal held that the relevant fact was withheld from the department and that the suppression and misdeclaration were established with intent to evade duty. On that basis, the ingredients for penalty under Section 11AC were satisfied, and payment of duty before the show cause notice did not absolve liability to penalty or interest. The first proviso to Section 11AC was held inapplicable because the interest component had not been paid within the stipulated period and remained unpaid.

Conclusion: The assessee was held liable to interest under Section 11AB and penalty equal to duty under Section 11AC, and was not entitled to the reduced penalty benefit under the first proviso to Section 11AC.

---