https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113787 Under the compounded levy scheme, revised mill capacity could not be applied retrospectively before the competent authority's capacity determination order, so differential excise duty for the pre-order period was unsustainable; the duty from December 1997 onwards was upheld. Unauthorized alteration of machinery affecting production capacity, without prior approval, justified penalty and interest because the explanation of repair was unreliable on the record. The penalty was moderated in light of the revised duty amount and reduced to Rs. 1 lakh, while the balance of the demand and interest remained sustained. en-us Tue, 30 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2012 14:23:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113787 Under the compounded levy scheme, revised mill capacity could not be applied retrospectively before the competent authority's capacity determination order, so differential excise duty for the pre-order period was unsustainable; the duty from December 1997 onwards was upheld. Unauthorized alteration of machinery affecting production capacity, without prior approval, justified penalty and interest because the explanation of repair was unreliable on the record. The penalty was moderated in light of the revised duty amount and reduced to Rs. 1 lakh, while the balance of the demand and interest remained sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113787