<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (9) TMI 451 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203201</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is attracted only when there is deliberate deception or an intention to evade duty. On the finding that the assessee had committed only a bona fide mistake, later rectified, and that there was no intent to evade tax, the penalty could not be sustained. The Tribunal&#039;s finding, affirmed by the High Court, therefore stood, and no interference was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 451 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203201</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is attracted only when there is deliberate deception or an intention to evade duty. On the finding that the assessee had committed only a bona fide mistake, later rectified, and that there was no intent to evade tax, the penalty could not be sustained. The Tribunal&#039;s finding, affirmed by the High Court, therefore stood, and no interference was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203201</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>