https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202852 Statutory interest under Rule 96ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held to arise concurrently with the duty default in the compounded levy regime. Because the provision was mandatory, recovery of interest could not be defeated merely by the absence of a separate show-cause notice. The challenge based on limitation was also rejected, as the time-bar objection was not made out on the facts. Recovery of interest was therefore sustained in favour of Revenue. en-us Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2015 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202852 Statutory interest under Rule 96ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held to arise concurrently with the duty default in the compounded levy regime. Because the provision was mandatory, recovery of interest could not be defeated merely by the absence of a separate show-cause notice. The challenge based on limitation was also rejected, as the time-bar objection was not made out on the facts. Recovery of interest was therefore sustained in favour of Revenue. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202852