https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370797 Under the CENVAT regime, penalty for shortfall in inputs was deleted because the dispute was interpretational and there was no finding of mala fide intent to evade duty. Although the demand and interest had already been upheld and were left undisturbed, the adjudication order had been passed before the jurisdictional High Court later settled the controversy. In line with the assessee's earlier matter, that subsequent clarification supported the view that penalty was not warranted for the period in question. en-us Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Nov 2018 07:23:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370797 Under the CENVAT regime, penalty for shortfall in inputs was deleted because the dispute was interpretational and there was no finding of mala fide intent to evade duty. Although the demand and interest had already been upheld and were left undisturbed, the adjudication order had been passed before the jurisdictional High Court later settled the controversy. In line with the assessee's earlier matter, that subsequent clarification supported the view that penalty was not warranted for the period in question. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370797