https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125961 Omission of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 did not extinguish duty and penalty liabilities that had already arisen from proceedings initiated under the compounded levy scheme, because Section 38A operated as a saving provision preserving accrued rights, liabilities, obligations, and pending proceedings. Delayed payment of dues determined under that scheme attracted penalty under Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as a statutory consequence of the default, and mens rea was treated as irrelevant where the rule made the penalty mandatory. The stated ratio is that accrued liabilities survive statutory omission when saved, and scheme-based penalty can follow without proof of intent. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:53:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125961 Omission of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 did not extinguish duty and penalty liabilities that had already arisen from proceedings initiated under the compounded levy scheme, because Section 38A operated as a saving provision preserving accrued rights, liabilities, obligations, and pending proceedings. Delayed payment of dues determined under that scheme attracted penalty under Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as a statutory consequence of the default, and mens rea was treated as irrelevant where the rule made the penalty mandatory. The stated ratio is that accrued liabilities survive statutory omission when saved, and scheme-based penalty can follow without proof of intent. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125961