https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379983 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Tribunal found that the penalty was not justified as there was no evidence of fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, or suppression of facts with the intent to evade duty. The appellant's failure to produce proof of export was considered a procedural lapse rather than intentional evasion, leading to the decision to overturn the penalty. en-us Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 May 2019 07:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379983 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Tribunal found that the penalty was not justified as there was no evidence of fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, or suppression of facts with the intent to evade duty. The appellant's failure to produce proof of export was considered a procedural lapse rather than intentional evasion, leading to the decision to overturn the penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379983