https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106689 Penalty under Rule 173Q was held unsustainable where an earlier final finding had already ruled out the extended period of limitation and confined the matter to duty for the normal period only. The later adjudication nevertheless imposed a penalty far exceeding the limited duty sustained, which was treated as an impermissible attempt to bypass the prior limitation ruling rather than a lawful consequence of the remand. The penalty was therefore set aside, and the principle stated is that any penalty must remain legally supportable on the restricted demand that survives the limitation finding. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:19:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106689 Penalty under Rule 173Q was held unsustainable where an earlier final finding had already ruled out the extended period of limitation and confined the matter to duty for the normal period only. The later adjudication nevertheless imposed a penalty far exceeding the limited duty sustained, which was treated as an impermissible attempt to bypass the prior limitation ruling rather than a lawful consequence of the remand. The penalty was therefore set aside, and the principle stated is that any penalty must remain legally supportable on the restricted demand that survives the limitation finding. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106689