https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4353 Where Rule 12B of the Central Excise Rules made the trader liable for duty on raw materials sent for job work, the duty demand was sustained because the record showed that neither the trader nor the job worker had discharged the liability. However, penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was set aside because the rule was newly introduced and the dispute arose from a procedural misunderstanding rather than deliberate evasion. Duty and interest were therefore upheld, while the equal penalty was deleted. en-us Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4353 Where Rule 12B of the Central Excise Rules made the trader liable for duty on raw materials sent for job work, the duty demand was sustained because the record showed that neither the trader nor the job worker had discharged the liability. However, penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was set aside because the rule was newly introduced and the dispute arose from a procedural misunderstanding rather than deliberate evasion. Duty and interest were therefore upheld, while the equal penalty was deleted. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4353