https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77763 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was treated as mandatory where suppression of facts with intent to evade duty was found, and payment of part of the duty before the show-cause notice did not displace that liability. The absence of an express option under the first proviso to Section 11AC did not require remand on the facts. Separately, the penalty imposed under the Central Excise Rules was confined to the only applicable penal provision, Rule 226, whose maximum penalty at the relevant time was Rs. 2,000; the higher penalty was therefore reduced accordingly. en-us Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77763 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was treated as mandatory where suppression of facts with intent to evade duty was found, and payment of part of the duty before the show-cause notice did not displace that liability. The absence of an express option under the first proviso to Section 11AC did not require remand on the facts. Separately, the penalty imposed under the Central Excise Rules was confined to the only applicable penal provision, Rule 226, whose maximum penalty at the relevant time was Rs. 2,000; the higher penalty was therefore reduced accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77763