https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253390 Penalty under the Central Excise penal framework was found to be mandatory once suppression of facts, contravention, and intent to evade duty were established. The notice and adjudication record showed clearance of modvatable inputs as warranty replacements without reversing credit or following the prescribed procedure, satisfying the statutory conditions for invocation of Rule 57(I)(4) read with Section 11AC. Accordingly, the contention that penalty could not be imposed for the relevant post-23.07.1996 period was rejected, and penalty was held imposable for 23.07.1996 to 28.09.1996. en-us Mon, 17 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Nov 2014 12:09:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253390 Penalty under the Central Excise penal framework was found to be mandatory once suppression of facts, contravention, and intent to evade duty were established. The notice and adjudication record showed clearance of modvatable inputs as warranty replacements without reversing credit or following the prescribed procedure, satisfying the statutory conditions for invocation of Rule 57(I)(4) read with Section 11AC. Accordingly, the contention that penalty could not be imposed for the relevant post-23.07.1996 period was rejected, and penalty was held imposable for 23.07.1996 to 28.09.1996. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253390