https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118882 Penalty under Rule 96ZP was unsustainable where the assessee paid duty at the earlier rate while writ petitions were pending under an interim stay against the provisional revision of annual capacity of production. The payment was not a voluntary default because the High Court had stayed operation of the revised order and the department itself permitted payment at the earlier rate during that stay. The premise that the assessee had deliberately failed to comply with the provisional order was therefore incorrect, and departmental issuance of demand notices during the pendency of the writ petitions also negated any claim of laxity. On that basis, the penalty could not stand, and there was no ground to enhance it to the maximum. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:36:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118882 Penalty under Rule 96ZP was unsustainable where the assessee paid duty at the earlier rate while writ petitions were pending under an interim stay against the provisional revision of annual capacity of production. The payment was not a voluntary default because the High Court had stayed operation of the revised order and the department itself permitted payment at the earlier rate during that stay. The premise that the assessee had deliberately failed to comply with the provisional order was therefore incorrect, and departmental issuance of demand notices during the pendency of the writ petitions also negated any claim of laxity. On that basis, the penalty could not stand, and there was no ground to enhance it to the maximum. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118882