https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121816 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be sustained where the duty demand period covered both pre- and post-introduction periods of that provision and no bifurcation was made between them. Because Section 11AC could not apply to conduct before 28-9-1996, a combined equivalent penalty based on an undivided demand period was not supportable on the record. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also set aside as imposed alongside the Section 11AC penalty without separate segregation of the relevant period-wise liability. en-us Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121816 Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be sustained where the duty demand period covered both pre- and post-introduction periods of that provision and no bifurcation was made between them. Because Section 11AC could not apply to conduct before 28-9-1996, a combined equivalent penalty based on an undivided demand period was not supportable on the record. Penalty under Rule 173Q was also set aside as imposed alongside the Section 11AC penalty without separate segregation of the relevant period-wise liability. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121816