https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244965 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to reduce the penalty imposed on the respondent from Rs. 11,97,798/- to Rs. 5,000/-. It found that there was no evidence of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts by the respondent, which are necessary for invoking Section 11AC and Rule 25. The Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's application of Rule 27 to impose a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- due to the circumstances of the case. en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244965 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to reduce the penalty imposed on the respondent from Rs. 11,97,798/- to Rs. 5,000/-. It found that there was no evidence of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts by the respondent, which are necessary for invoking Section 11AC and Rule 25. The Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's application of Rule 27 to impose a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- due to the circumstances of the case. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244965