https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111157 The case involved a Revenue appeal against an order allowing the respondents' appeal regarding duty liability for replacement goods. The respondents cleared goods without paying Central Excise duty, claiming they were replacements for damaged goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) found no intent to evade duty, overturning the original duty confirmation. The Managing Director's admission led to duty liability on these goods, with penalties reduced to Rs. 10,000. The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's appeal by reducing penalties and setting aside others, with the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding the Managing Director being final. en-us Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:20:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111157 The case involved a Revenue appeal against an order allowing the respondents' appeal regarding duty liability for replacement goods. The respondents cleared goods without paying Central Excise duty, claiming they were replacements for damaged goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) found no intent to evade duty, overturning the original duty confirmation. The Managing Director's admission led to duty liability on these goods, with penalties reduced to Rs. 10,000. The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's appeal by reducing penalties and setting aside others, with the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding the Managing Director being final. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111157