https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81177 A penalty was found unwarranted where the dispute related only to the method of computing clearance value for the exemption limit under Notification No. 89/79. The controversy was confined to valuation for exemption purposes, and there was no proven breach of the duty-removal requirement under Rule 173F or any demand based on alleged excess clearances. On that footing, the absence of a substantive violation meant penal action could not be sustained, and the penalty was set aside. en-us Tue, 13 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:38:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81177 A penalty was found unwarranted where the dispute related only to the method of computing clearance value for the exemption limit under Notification No. 89/79. The controversy was confined to valuation for exemption purposes, and there was no proven breach of the duty-removal requirement under Rule 173F or any demand based on alleged excess clearances. On that footing, the absence of a substantive violation meant penal action could not be sustained, and the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81177