I find this justification a little thin on the ground. What bad intel could be produced in reality if we're not specifically stating "this fight will be easy" or "this fight will be hard." The players are going to tend to want information on monster traits, powers, etc. or perhaps their location or the details of the location. Those are just facts that can be conveyed with no relation to the overall difficulty they may present. The players can make their own decisions based on that information what they think the difficulty may be.(Emphasis added.) Similarly to you I don't balance encounters against the party's capabilities. But to make that work I think it's essential that the characters' intel-gathering efforts that you mention have meaningful results. If the PCs are basing their decisions on intel I intended to be accurate, but (whether due to a mistake on my part or OOC misscomunication) isn't accurate, I have a choice to make between: (1) honoring my notes, effectively retroactively making the PC's information bad intel; (2) honoring the accuracy of the intel and revising my notes to match that intel; (3) openly explaining the error and retconning the actions made in reliance on the erroneous intel. (There may be other options, but I think most options fall broadly into these categories.)
The intel has already been introduced into play, while my notes haven't been introduced yet. That makes it straightforward for me to prioritize honoring the intel over honoring my as-yet-unintroduced notes, even though revising my notes would qualify as fudging under the broader definitions of the term. Option 3 would also work, but I personally prefer to avoid retconning whenever possible, making the fudging in Option 2 my preferred solution.
In other words, it's not that I feel any need to correct an encounter than is too strong or too weak according to an abstract scale. But I do feel the need to correct an encounter that the PCs approached in reliance on intel they successfully earned that turns out to have been wrong or misleading.