<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (3) TMI 487 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245034</link>
    <description>Mandatory penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty is alleged and proved. In the absence of those statutory ingredients, the precondition for invoking section 11AC was not satisfied, so penalty could not be imposed merely because duty and interest had been paid. Section 11AC was therefore held inapplicable and the penalty was not imposable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2014 12:10:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 487 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245034</link>
      <description>Mandatory penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty is alleged and proved. In the absence of those statutory ingredients, the precondition for invoking section 11AC was not satisfied, so penalty could not be imposed merely because duty and interest had been paid. Section 11AC was therefore held inapplicable and the penalty was not imposable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>