https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355218 The tribunal set aside the confiscation of excess transformers as the failure to follow Rule 10 did not indicate an intention to evade duty. However, a penalty under Rule 25 was imposed for non-compliance with Rule 10, which was reduced to Rs. 2,00,000 due to mitigating circumstances. The importance of maintaining proper records for the movement of goods was emphasized, leading to the upheld penalty. The Appeal was partly allowed, modifying the impugned order accordingly. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:17:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355218 The tribunal set aside the confiscation of excess transformers as the failure to follow Rule 10 did not indicate an intention to evade duty. However, a penalty under Rule 25 was imposed for non-compliance with Rule 10, which was reduced to Rs. 2,00,000 due to mitigating circumstances. The importance of maintaining proper records for the movement of goods was emphasized, leading to the upheld penalty. The Appeal was partly allowed, modifying the impugned order accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355218