https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33786 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against duty demand confirmation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to lack of evidence showing intent to evade duty, as required for penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The case highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural rules to prevent revenue loss, emphasizing the necessity of concrete proof before penalizing rule violations. The decision aligned with previous Tribunal rulings on similar matters, emphasizing the significance of upholding procedural requirements in excise matters to safeguard against potential revenue evasion. en-us Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33786 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against duty demand confirmation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to lack of evidence showing intent to evade duty, as required for penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The case highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural rules to prevent revenue loss, emphasizing the necessity of concrete proof before penalizing rule violations. The decision aligned with previous Tribunal rulings on similar matters, emphasizing the significance of upholding procedural requirements in excise matters to safeguard against potential revenue evasion. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33786