https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437043 The Tribunal upheld the demand for differential duty, interest, and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, in a case where the appellant failed to disclose the correct abatement notification, leading to a differential duty liability. The appellant's argument of bona fide error was dismissed, with the Tribunal emphasizing that ignorance of the law does not excuse deliberate evasion of duty. The decision was based on precedents establishing that deliberate suppression of facts warrants penalties, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal on 11.04.2023. en-us Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Apr 2023 08:58:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437043 The Tribunal upheld the demand for differential duty, interest, and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, in a case where the appellant failed to disclose the correct abatement notification, leading to a differential duty liability. The appellant's argument of bona fide error was dismissed, with the Tribunal emphasizing that ignorance of the law does not excuse deliberate evasion of duty. The decision was based on precedents establishing that deliberate suppression of facts warrants penalties, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal on 11.04.2023. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437043