https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205568 Separate penalties under Rule 9(2), Rule 52A and Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were not sustainable where the same contraventions were already covered by a penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The basis for relief was that the offences sought to be penalised under the rules were comprehended within the Section 11AC penalty, so additional punishment for the same misconduct was unwarranted. On that footing, the separate rule-based penalties were vacated. en-us Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 12:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205568 Separate penalties under Rule 9(2), Rule 52A and Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were not sustainable where the same contraventions were already covered by a penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The basis for relief was that the offences sought to be penalised under the rules were comprehended within the Section 11AC penalty, so additional punishment for the same misconduct was unwarranted. On that footing, the separate rule-based penalties were vacated. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205568