https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115757 Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 made penalty and interest payable where a manufacturer failed to discharge the full monthly duty liability. Non-payment of the entire duty for May 1998 attracted the provision because the duty continued to be determined by the order fixing annual capacity of production then in force. A pending request for re-determination of capacity did not suspend or invalidate that operative order, and liability persisted until the order was revised or set aside. The assessee could not withhold payment on the basis of a sought reassessment, and penalty remained leviable, though reduced to a nominal amount. en-us Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:25:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115757 Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 made penalty and interest payable where a manufacturer failed to discharge the full monthly duty liability. Non-payment of the entire duty for May 1998 attracted the provision because the duty continued to be determined by the order fixing annual capacity of production then in force. A pending request for re-determination of capacity did not suspend or invalidate that operative order, and liability persisted until the order was revised or set aside. The assessee could not withhold payment on the basis of a sought reassessment, and penalty remained leviable, though reduced to a nominal amount. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115757