Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Circulars
of of All Circulars
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Mandatory Penalties for Duty Evasion: CESTAT Confirms No Discretion u/s 11AC and Section 114A.</h1> The Central Board of Excise & Customs issued a circular addressing the imposition of penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. The CESTAT Larger Bench ruled that these sections mandate a penalty equal to the duty evaded, without discretion for a lesser amount, except where specifically amended. This decision, following a remand by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, clarifies that once mens rea is established, the penalty is not discretionary. The circular advises using this decision as a guideline to ensure consistent penalty imposition practices.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
