https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385875 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Ld. Commissioner to impose a penalty of &8377; 60 Lakhs under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, instead of section 11AC, on a 100% EOU for diverting goods to DTA with permission after an order cancellation. The Tribunal found no malafide intention in the diversion and emphasized the significance of intention and permission in such cases, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeal for a penalty under section 11AC. en-us Tue, 05 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:23:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385875 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Ld. Commissioner to impose a penalty of &8377; 60 Lakhs under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, instead of section 11AC, on a 100% EOU for diverting goods to DTA with permission after an order cancellation. The Tribunal found no malafide intention in the diversion and emphasized the significance of intention and permission in such cases, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeal for a penalty under section 11AC. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385875