https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2867 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's ruling in an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, concerning penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The Court emphasized the need to establish intent to evade duty, which was lacking in this case. As the duty was paid before the show cause notice, indicating no intent to evade duty, the Court found no legal flaw in the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the revenue's appeal. The judgment underscored the importance of proving intent to evade duty for penalty imposition, ultimately ruling in favor of the manufacturer. en-us Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2867 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's ruling in an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, concerning penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The Court emphasized the need to establish intent to evade duty, which was lacking in this case. As the duty was paid before the show cause notice, indicating no intent to evade duty, the Court found no legal flaw in the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the revenue's appeal. The judgment underscored the importance of proving intent to evade duty for penalty imposition, ultimately ruling in favor of the manufacturer. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2867