https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416188 The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the reduced penalty of 25% under Section 11AC (1) (e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant's deposit during investigation covered the confirmed demand, interest, and 25% penalty, justifying the refund claim. Despite the Revenue's argument that the full penalty was payable due to the lack of a written election for reduced penalty, the Adjudicating authority's decision to grant the refund after deducting the penalty was upheld. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant with consequential relief. en-us Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Dec 2021 12:07:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416188 The Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the reduced penalty of 25% under Section 11AC (1) (e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant's deposit during investigation covered the confirmed demand, interest, and 25% penalty, justifying the refund claim. Despite the Revenue's argument that the full penalty was payable due to the lack of a written election for reduced penalty, the Adjudicating authority's decision to grant the refund after deducting the penalty was upheld. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416188