https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125738 Penalty under Rule 173Q and Section 11AC was examined in a case involving alleged excess transportation charges used to suppress assessable value. The tribunal noted that the assessee's admission supported an intention to evade duty, so voluntary deposit did not by itself eliminate penal consequences. Section 11AC was treated as mandatory for the period after 28-9-96, but the exact penalty for that post-amendment period had not been quantified, so the matter was remanded for determination of the amount. The reduced penalty of Rs. 50,000 was retained as relatable to the period before 28-9-96 under Rule 173Q. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Oct 2012 16:45:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125738 Penalty under Rule 173Q and Section 11AC was examined in a case involving alleged excess transportation charges used to suppress assessable value. The tribunal noted that the assessee's admission supported an intention to evade duty, so voluntary deposit did not by itself eliminate penal consequences. Section 11AC was treated as mandatory for the period after 28-9-96, but the exact penalty for that post-amendment period had not been quantified, so the matter was remanded for determination of the amount. The reduced penalty of Rs. 50,000 was retained as relatable to the period before 28-9-96 under Rule 173Q. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125738