https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125589 Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the duty was paid on the 12th day of the month together with interest, because the proviso differentiates between interest for delayed payment and penalty for duty outstanding at the end of the month. As the duty liability had been discharged before month-end, no duty remained outstanding for penalty purposes. The inference of deliberate evasion was rejected as unsupported by the rule and the facts on record, and the penalty order was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:19:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125589 Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the duty was paid on the 12th day of the month together with interest, because the proviso differentiates between interest for delayed payment and penalty for duty outstanding at the end of the month. As the duty liability had been discharged before month-end, no duty remained outstanding for penalty purposes. The inference of deliberate evasion was rejected as unsupported by the rule and the facts on record, and the penalty order was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125589