Appeal allowed, penalty overturned under Central Excise Act. Compliance rewarded, no willful default found.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal considered the appellant's compliance history, timely payment of differential amounts, and alignment with CBEC instructions, concluding that there was no willful default or intent to evade revenue. The penalty was overturned based on the appellant's rectification of the oversight and adherence to prescribed procedures, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing motor vehicle parts, faced a dispute regarding the imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, related to the stock transfer of semi-finished goods to sister units without following prescribed procedures.
2. Central Excise officers observed discrepancies during an audit, leading to show cause proceedings and subsequent imposition of duty demand and penalty by the adjudicating authority, which was confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
3. The appellant argued that they rectified the oversight by paying the differential duty and interest upon finalization of revised CAS-4 certificates, emphasizing no intention to undervalue goods, thus contending against the penalty under Section 11AC.
4. The Tribunal analyzed the appellant's past compliance history, noting instances of overpayment in previous years and the timely deposit of the differential amount before the show cause notice was issued, indicating no willful default or intent to evade revenue.
5. Referring to CBEC instructions allowing preparation of cost data certificates based on actual data by a specified deadline, the Tribunal found the appellant's actions aligned with the clarification, further citing a precedent where a penalty was set aside in a similar situation.
6. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in upholding the penalty imposed under Section 11AC, leading to the allowance of the appeal in favor of the appellant, thereby setting aside the penalty in question.

---