https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52274 Penalty under the Central Excise law could not survive once the underlying duty demand had been set aside as time-barred, because a connected penalty ordinarily falls with the demand. Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 also failed because the record did not show specific allegations, supporting evidence, or the requisite knowledge or reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation. Mens rea was treated as essential for that penalty. Both penalties were therefore correctly deleted and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2010 16:38:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52274 Penalty under the Central Excise law could not survive once the underlying duty demand had been set aside as time-barred, because a connected penalty ordinarily falls with the demand. Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 also failed because the record did not show specific allegations, supporting evidence, or the requisite knowledge or reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation. Mens rea was treated as essential for that penalty. Both penalties were therefore correctly deleted and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52274