https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125585 Penalty for delayed payment of duty under Rule 96-ZP(3) could not be sustained where it was imposed mechanically without any finding of fraudulent intention or mens rea. The assessee had admitted the duty liability and interest, and the delay was attributed to financial difficulty, so the interest payable neutralised any gain from the delay. On that basis, the absence of a mens rea finding was material to the validity of the penalty, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:03:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125585 Penalty for delayed payment of duty under Rule 96-ZP(3) could not be sustained where it was imposed mechanically without any finding of fraudulent intention or mens rea. The assessee had admitted the duty liability and interest, and the delay was attributed to financial difficulty, so the interest payable neutralised any gain from the delay. On that basis, the absence of a mens rea finding was material to the validity of the penalty, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125585