https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352279 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the valuation of physician samples under Central Excise Valuation Rules and the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC. The Tribunal upheld the duty and interest demand but set aside the penalty under Section 11AC. They found no evidence of suppression of facts or malicious intent by the appellant, emphasizing compliance with valuation rules, the influence of precedents and circulars, and the importance of lack of fraudulent intent in penalty determinations. en-us Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:04:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352279 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the valuation of physician samples under Central Excise Valuation Rules and the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC. The Tribunal upheld the duty and interest demand but set aside the penalty under Section 11AC. They found no evidence of suppression of facts or malicious intent by the appellant, emphasizing compliance with valuation rules, the influence of precedents and circulars, and the importance of lack of fraudulent intent in penalty determinations. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352279