https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211918 A short payment arising from incorrect determination of assessable value may attract penalty for contravention of the Central Excise Rules even without proof of intent to evade duty, but the penalty must be confined to the clause actually attracted and reduced to the statutory minimum where warranted. Here, removal in breach of Rules 173C and 173F supported penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(a), while the allegation of deliberate evasion was not established. An adjustment of the penalty against the sanctioned rebate was impermissible because no legal provision authorised such deduction. The penalty was retained only as a nominal amount and the rebate adjustment was set aside. en-us Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Sep 2012 18:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211918 A short payment arising from incorrect determination of assessable value may attract penalty for contravention of the Central Excise Rules even without proof of intent to evade duty, but the penalty must be confined to the clause actually attracted and reduced to the statutory minimum where warranted. Here, removal in breach of Rules 173C and 173F supported penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(a), while the allegation of deliberate evasion was not established. An adjustment of the penalty against the sanctioned rebate was impermissible because no legal provision authorised such deduction. The penalty was retained only as a nominal amount and the rebate adjustment was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211918