https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252239 The Member (J) upheld the demand as uncontested and reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty demand. The judgment emphasized the correct application of penalty provisions under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and the significance of complying with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for penalty reduction. The appeal was disposed of with the penalty reduction in favor of the appellant based on the timely deposit of duty and a portion of the penalty. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:16:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252239 The Member (J) upheld the demand as uncontested and reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty demand. The judgment emphasized the correct application of penalty provisions under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and the significance of complying with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for penalty reduction. The appeal was disposed of with the penalty reduction in favor of the appellant based on the timely deposit of duty and a portion of the penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252239