https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209259 Doctrine of merger did not bar the Revenue's appeal because the earlier appeal had not decided the distinct question of whether mandatory penalty under Section 11AC should follow a confirmed duty demand. The appellate challenge was therefore maintainable. Penalty under Section 11AC was not leviable because the show cause notice contained no allegation of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade duty, and the delay in payment was treated as bona fide. The statutory conditions for mandatory penalty were not satisfied, so the order refusing penalty was sustained. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209259 Doctrine of merger did not bar the Revenue's appeal because the earlier appeal had not decided the distinct question of whether mandatory penalty under Section 11AC should follow a confirmed duty demand. The appellate challenge was therefore maintainable. Penalty under Section 11AC was not leviable because the show cause notice contained no allegation of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade duty, and the delay in payment was treated as bona fide. The statutory conditions for mandatory penalty were not satisfied, so the order refusing penalty was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209259