https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328559 The case involved the confiscation of capital goods for non-payment of excise duty by M/s. ITC Ltd. The appellant argued that since duty was promptly paid after notification without intent to evade, confiscation should not apply under Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act. The Member (Judicial) concluded that as there was no suppression of facts or fraudulent intent, the show cause notice and confiscation were unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. en-us Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328559 The case involved the confiscation of capital goods for non-payment of excise duty by M/s. ITC Ltd. The appellant argued that since duty was promptly paid after notification without intent to evade, confiscation should not apply under Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act. The Member (Judicial) concluded that as there was no suppression of facts or fraudulent intent, the show cause notice and confiscation were unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328559