https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342873 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner(Appeals) to set aside the penalty under Section 11AC, as the duty and interest were paid before the show cause notice was issued. The Tribunal found no evidence of malafide intention by the respondent in the differential duty issue, noting the open business operations and lack of price alterations on packages. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the case was settled under Section 11A(2B) without imposing a penalty. The judgment was delivered on 26/4/2017, concluding the legal proceedings. en-us Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 May 2017 18:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342873 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner(Appeals) to set aside the penalty under Section 11AC, as the duty and interest were paid before the show cause notice was issued. The Tribunal found no evidence of malafide intention by the respondent in the differential duty issue, noting the open business operations and lack of price alterations on packages. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the case was settled under Section 11A(2B) without imposing a penalty. The judgment was delivered on 26/4/2017, concluding the legal proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342873