https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354225 The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant as the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was set aside by the Appellate Authority. The penalty was deemed unjustified due to a discrepancy in payment receipt and duty interpretation, indicating no deliberate evasion of Central Excise duty. The Appellate Authority found that the absence of a bank realization certificate cannot be the sole basis for denying duty rebate on exported goods. The order confirming the duty demand was unsustainable once export was established, leading to the appeal's success for the appellant. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:49:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354225 The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant as the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was set aside by the Appellate Authority. The penalty was deemed unjustified due to a discrepancy in payment receipt and duty interpretation, indicating no deliberate evasion of Central Excise duty. The Appellate Authority found that the absence of a bank realization certificate cannot be the sole basis for denying duty rebate on exported goods. The order confirming the duty demand was unsustainable once export was established, leading to the appeal's success for the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354225