https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126557 The penalties imposed on the appellant for defaulting in duty payment were reduced to Rs. 5,000 each by the judge. The penalties were found to be imposed under Rule 25 read with Section 11AC, with Rule 8(3A) not directly applicable. The judge determined that there was no fraudulent intent to evade duty payment, leading to the reduction in penalties based on a previous order in the same appellant's case. The appeals were disposed of, and stay petitions were resolved by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J., on 29-7-2009. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126557 The penalties imposed on the appellant for defaulting in duty payment were reduced to Rs. 5,000 each by the judge. The penalties were found to be imposed under Rule 25 read with Section 11AC, with Rule 8(3A) not directly applicable. The judge determined that there was no fraudulent intent to evade duty payment, leading to the reduction in penalties based on a previous order in the same appellant's case. The appeals were disposed of, and stay petitions were resolved by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J., on 29-7-2009. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126557