https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126533 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not attracted where excess Cenvat credit was availed by mistake, reversed promptly with interest before notice, and the record did not show suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The statutory ingredients, including mens rea, were therefore not established. A separate penalty under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was upheld because the assessee did not produce records before the audit party, constituting a distinct contravention. The penal consequence was sustained only to that limited extent, while the Section 11AC penalty was deleted. en-us Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:12:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126533 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not attracted where excess Cenvat credit was availed by mistake, reversed promptly with interest before notice, and the record did not show suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The statutory ingredients, including mens rea, were therefore not established. A separate penalty under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was upheld because the assessee did not produce records before the audit party, constituting a distinct contravention. The penal consequence was sustained only to that limited extent, while the Section 11AC penalty was deleted. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126533