https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41172 Exemption from concessional excise duty under Notification No. 116/69-CE depended on strict proof that Ioquin tablets and ampoules satisfied the notification conditions. Because the chemical evidence showed therapeutically active ingredients other than quinine in substantial quantities, and the claimant produced no convincing proof of eligibility, the lower rate was denied and differential duty sustained. Penalty under Rule 173-Q required contravention with intent to evade duty; as the classification lists had been filed and approved, the department knew the mode of clearance, and the goods had long been assessed at the lower rate, intent to evade was not established. The penalty was therefore set aside. en-us Sat, 02 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 May 2010 10:35:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41172 Exemption from concessional excise duty under Notification No. 116/69-CE depended on strict proof that Ioquin tablets and ampoules satisfied the notification conditions. Because the chemical evidence showed therapeutically active ingredients other than quinine in substantial quantities, and the claimant produced no convincing proof of eligibility, the lower rate was denied and differential duty sustained. Penalty under Rule 173-Q required contravention with intent to evade duty; as the classification lists had been filed and approved, the department knew the mode of clearance, and the goods had long been assessed at the lower rate, intent to evade was not established. The penalty was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 02 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41172