https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352976 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the absence of malicious intent in the duty payment discrepancy. The decision set aside the extended period demand, penalties, and interest, directing a reevaluation of duty for the normal period. The judgment underscored the significance of intent in excise duty cases, ultimately modifying the original order in favor of the appellant. en-us Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 08:40:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352976 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the absence of malicious intent in the duty payment discrepancy. The decision set aside the extended period demand, penalties, and interest, directing a reevaluation of duty for the normal period. The judgment underscored the significance of intent in excise duty cases, ultimately modifying the original order in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352976