https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209580 Penalty for wrongful CENVAT credit under the aggravated fraud and suppression regime requires proof of fraud, collusion, suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The Court accepted concurrent findings that the evidence did not show the assessee was party to any fraud or that credit was taken with evasion intent, and held the adjudicating authority's suppression finding rested on conjecture rather than proof. Rule 13(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was therefore not attracted, and the corresponding penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unwarranted. No substantial question of law arose from the factual findings. en-us Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209580 Penalty for wrongful CENVAT credit under the aggravated fraud and suppression regime requires proof of fraud, collusion, suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The Court accepted concurrent findings that the evidence did not show the assessee was party to any fraud or that credit was taken with evasion intent, and held the adjudicating authority's suppression finding rested on conjecture rather than proof. Rule 13(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was therefore not attracted, and the corresponding penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unwarranted. No substantial question of law arose from the factual findings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209580