https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205621 The High Court held that adjudicating authorities do not have discretion to impose a lesser penalty under Section 11-AC than the duty determined under Section 11-A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite evidence of duty suppression and intent to evade duty, the penalty was reduced due to timely payment of duty and interest. However, as the penalty was not paid within the stipulated time, the Court found the reduction unlawful. The Court set aside previous judgments, ruling in favor of the appellant-revenue and disallowing the reduction of penalty. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205621 The High Court held that adjudicating authorities do not have discretion to impose a lesser penalty under Section 11-AC than the duty determined under Section 11-A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite evidence of duty suppression and intent to evade duty, the penalty was reduced due to timely payment of duty and interest. However, as the penalty was not paid within the stipulated time, the Court found the reduction unlawful. The Court set aside previous judgments, ruling in favor of the appellant-revenue and disallowing the reduction of penalty. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 03 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205621