https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262232 The judge set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the appellant, a manufacturer of P&P medicines. The penalty was dropped due to the absence of malicious intent or facts suppression, considering the consistent payment of excise duty on physician samples using the cost construction method. The judge referenced decisions from the High Courts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh in support of this decision, highlighting that the penalty under Rule 25 was not warranted in this case. en-us Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Aug 2015 10:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262232 The judge set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the appellant, a manufacturer of P&P medicines. The penalty was dropped due to the absence of malicious intent or facts suppression, considering the consistent payment of excise duty on physician samples using the cost construction method. The judge referenced decisions from the High Courts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh in support of this decision, highlighting that the penalty under Rule 25 was not warranted in this case. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262232