https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214396 Deemed credit could not be denied merely because a duty differential arose on adoption of average value; the notification's denial clause applied only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of value was established. On the facts, the record did not prove such culpable conduct, so deemed credit was allowed. The penalty under Rule 57I was not sustainable on the same facts and was set aside. The duty demand and reduced penalty amounts were, however, upheld. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jun 2012 18:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214396 Deemed credit could not be denied merely because a duty differential arose on adoption of average value; the notification's denial clause applied only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of value was established. On the facts, the record did not prove such culpable conduct, so deemed credit was allowed. The penalty under Rule 57I was not sustainable on the same facts and was set aside. The duty demand and reduced penalty amounts were, however, upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214396