https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125565 Brand names, dealer statements, invoice and gate-pass descriptions, representative denials and chemical test results together established that the goods cleared as cotton fabric were in fact 100% polyester fabric, so the duty demand was upheld. Penalty, however, could not be sustained without first determining whether the confirmed duty was levied under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957, because the governing statute was material to the availability of a penal provision. The penalty issue was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after identifying the exact statutory basis of the duty. en-us Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:51:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125565 Brand names, dealer statements, invoice and gate-pass descriptions, representative denials and chemical test results together established that the goods cleared as cotton fabric were in fact 100% polyester fabric, so the duty demand was upheld. Penalty, however, could not be sustained without first determining whether the confirmed duty was levied under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957, because the governing statute was material to the availability of a penal provision. The penalty issue was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after identifying the exact statutory basis of the duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125565