https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251990 The Tribunal decided in favor of the Revenue's classification of the appellant's product under heading 2101.20, making the appellant liable for payment of differential duty. However, no penalty was imposed as there was no malicious intent on the appellant's part. In the appeal regarding liability for interest, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant was not liable to pay interest under Section 11AB for the relevant period, as there was no fraud or suppression of facts. The demand for interest was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. en-us Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jun 2015 13:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251990 The Tribunal decided in favor of the Revenue's classification of the appellant's product under heading 2101.20, making the appellant liable for payment of differential duty. However, no penalty was imposed as there was no malicious intent on the appellant's part. In the appeal regarding liability for interest, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant was not liable to pay interest under Section 11AB for the relevant period, as there was no fraud or suppression of facts. The demand for interest was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251990