https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153828 The appellant appealed against a penalty and interest demand imposed under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The court found that there was a lack of evidence showing collusion or knowledge of misuse by the appellant, leading to the conclusion that the penalty and interest demands were not applicable. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged in the appeal, and the appeal was allowed. The judgment emphasized the importance of specific attribution of intent to evade duty and the need for evidence to support allegations of misuse of Cenvat Credit. en-us Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:19:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153828 The appellant appealed against a penalty and interest demand imposed under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The court found that there was a lack of evidence showing collusion or knowledge of misuse by the appellant, leading to the conclusion that the penalty and interest demands were not applicable. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged in the appeal, and the appeal was allowed. The judgment emphasized the importance of specific attribution of intent to evade duty and the need for evidence to support allegations of misuse of Cenvat Credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153828