Penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) fails without Section 11A notice and proof of suppression of facts.

Penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) was held unsustainable because the Tribunal had already found no suppression of facts, and the statutory ingredients for invoking Section 11AC were absent. The Tribunal noted that penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) is subject to the requirements of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and that a show cause notice under Section 11A(1) had not been issued. On that basis, the statutory foundation needed to sustain the penalty was missing, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) was sustainable when no show cause notice had been issued under Section 11A(1) and the Tribunal had already found no suppression of facts.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that its earlier order had recorded a finding of no suppression of facts by the appellant. It further held that penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) is subject to the requirements of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and that the ingredients for invoking Section 11AC must exist before such penalty can be imposed. Since no show cause notice had been issued under Section 11A(1), the statutory basis necessary for sustaining the penalty was absent.

Conclusion: The penalty under Rule 25(1)(a) was held to be not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---