https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118075 A challenge to penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be reopened in the later round because the earlier remand order showed that the grievance against the penalty had not been pressed before the Tribunal. The appellant was therefore bound by that remand order, and the contention that the earlier order had impliedly set aside the penalty was rejected. Any objection to the remand order itself could only have been pursued by seeking rectification of mistake. The challenge to the Section 11AC penalty was accordingly rejected, and the penalty was upheld. en-us Fri, 19 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:57:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118075 A challenge to penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be reopened in the later round because the earlier remand order showed that the grievance against the penalty had not been pressed before the Tribunal. The appellant was therefore bound by that remand order, and the contention that the earlier order had impliedly set aside the penalty was rejected. Any objection to the remand order itself could only have been pursued by seeking rectification of mistake. The challenge to the Section 11AC penalty was accordingly rejected, and the penalty was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118075