https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73231 Penalty under Rule 173Q(d) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was unsustainable because the contravention was not shown to have been committed with intent to evade duty. The duty amounts had been deposited in the treasury, the wrong duty heads in the challans were attributed to an inadvertent mistake, and the record did not establish any mala fide intention. Prompt explanation of the error and the fact that departmental officers had signed the return also supported the absence of evasion. A genuine irregularity, without proof of intent to evade, was held insufficient to justify penalty, and the assessee succeeded. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 May 2011 15:04:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73231 Penalty under Rule 173Q(d) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was unsustainable because the contravention was not shown to have been committed with intent to evade duty. The duty amounts had been deposited in the treasury, the wrong duty heads in the challans were attributed to an inadvertent mistake, and the record did not establish any mala fide intention. Prompt explanation of the error and the fact that departmental officers had signed the return also supported the absence of evasion. A genuine irregularity, without proof of intent to evade, was held insufficient to justify penalty, and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73231