The CESTAT held that penalty under section 114A CA, 1962,...

The CESTAT held that penalty under section 114A CA, 1962, requires willful mis-statement, suppression of facts, or collusion, which were absent in this case involving classification disputes. The appellant had paid the full differential duty with interest after reviewing the classification as proposed by the DRI. The Tribunal found the Commissioner erred in issuing the show cause notice invoking the extended limitation period under section 28(2), as the case fell under section 28(1) where no willful evasion occurred. Since the appellant had made a truthful declaration in the Bill of Entry and self-assessed duty accordingly, the demand did not justify extended limitation or penalty. Consequently, the impugned order confirming the show cause notice was set aside, the appeal allowed, and no refund of duty or interest was granted to the appellant.