https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343128 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was held unsustainable where the assessee followed an estimated or provisional cost-based valuation method, disclosed it through regular correspondence, and later paid the differential duty with interest after cost audit. The essential ingredient for penalty, namely suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, was not established on these facts. Although provisional assessment would have been the proper course, the Revenue's prior knowledge of the valuation method and the absence of deliberate evasion meant penal action was not justified, and the penalty was set aside. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 May 2017 07:50:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343128 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was held unsustainable where the assessee followed an estimated or provisional cost-based valuation method, disclosed it through regular correspondence, and later paid the differential duty with interest after cost audit. The essential ingredient for penalty, namely suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, was not established on these facts. Although provisional assessment would have been the proper course, the Revenue's prior knowledge of the valuation method and the absence of deliberate evasion meant penal action was not justified, and the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343128