https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271937 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, for undervaluation of goods and confirmed differential duties. The Tribunal found that the appellant had already paid a higher amount of Central Excise duty than confirmed by the Commissioner, and the correct accounting principles were applied in determining the cost of production. Emphasizing the lack of malafide intent and the excessive duty payment made by the appellant, the Tribunal deemed the penalty imposition legally unsustainable and allowed the appeal. en-us Thu, 11 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271937 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, for undervaluation of goods and confirmed differential duties. The Tribunal found that the appellant had already paid a higher amount of Central Excise duty than confirmed by the Commissioner, and the correct accounting principles were applied in determining the cost of production. Emphasizing the lack of malafide intent and the excessive duty payment made by the appellant, the Tribunal deemed the penalty imposition legally unsustainable and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271937