https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209563 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation and penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, citing the absence of mala fide intention to evade duty. However, a penalty under Rule 27 for procedural lapse was imposed. The decision underscored the necessity of proving intent to evade duty for confiscation and penalty, distinguishing between procedural lapses and deliberate evasion. en-us Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209563 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation and penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, citing the absence of mala fide intention to evade duty. However, a penalty under Rule 27 for procedural lapse was imposed. The decision underscored the necessity of proving intent to evade duty for confiscation and penalty, distinguishing between procedural lapses and deliberate evasion. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209563