https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125019 Where equal penalty had already been imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act for the same transaction, a separate penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was held unsustainable. The reasoning was that the penal consequence under Section 11AC had already addressed the evasion-related default, and the Board's supplementary instructions were relied on to support the view that no further penalty should be levied on the same facts. As duty and interest had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice, the additional Rule 25 penalty was set aside. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:39:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125019 Where equal penalty had already been imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act for the same transaction, a separate penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was held unsustainable. The reasoning was that the penal consequence under Section 11AC had already addressed the evasion-related default, and the Board's supplementary instructions were relied on to support the view that no further penalty should be levied on the same facts. As duty and interest had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice, the additional Rule 25 penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125019