https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125689 Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was attracted where goods were cleared without payment of duty despite knowledge of liability, and the monthly return disclosed only clearances without duty particulars. Subsequent payment of duty after the default was pointed out, but before issuance of show cause notice, did not by itself extinguish the breach. The omission to specify the sub-rule in the penalty order was treated as a technical lapse and not fatal to the levy. The challenge to penalty failed on merits, though the quantum of penalty was reduced. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Oct 2012 12:19:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125689 Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was attracted where goods were cleared without payment of duty despite knowledge of liability, and the monthly return disclosed only clearances without duty particulars. Subsequent payment of duty after the default was pointed out, but before issuance of show cause notice, did not by itself extinguish the breach. The omission to specify the sub-rule in the penalty order was treated as a technical lapse and not fatal to the levy. The challenge to penalty failed on merits, though the quantum of penalty was reduced. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125689