https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107405 Contravention of central excise procedural requirements, coupled with intent to evade duty, justified invocation of the extended limitation period and sustained the duty demand. However, interest under Section 11AB and mandatory penalty under Section 11AC could not be imposed for a period before those provisions came into force, so both were set aside. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also deleted because the lower orders did not record the necessary finding to support it, despite the alleged non-accountal of dutiable waste and scrap. The result was sustenance of the duty demand, with deletion of interest and penalties. en-us Fri, 02 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:18:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107405 Contravention of central excise procedural requirements, coupled with intent to evade duty, justified invocation of the extended limitation period and sustained the duty demand. However, interest under Section 11AB and mandatory penalty under Section 11AC could not be imposed for a period before those provisions came into force, so both were set aside. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also deleted because the lower orders did not record the necessary finding to support it, despite the alleged non-accountal of dutiable waste and scrap. The result was sustenance of the duty demand, with deletion of interest and penalties. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107405