https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209551 A demand, interest and penalties based on an earlier order that had already been set aside could not be sustained, because the adjudication required a fresh appraisal of the facts and material; the dispute was remanded for de novo decision after hearing the assessee. Separate penalties under Rule 15(1) and Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 were also held impermissible where the show cause notice proposed only a composite penalty under Section 11AC and did not allege distinct grounds for separate penal consequences. The notice could not be expanded beyond its terms, so the additional penalty challenge failed. en-us Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209551 A demand, interest and penalties based on an earlier order that had already been set aside could not be sustained, because the adjudication required a fresh appraisal of the facts and material; the dispute was remanded for de novo decision after hearing the assessee. Separate penalties under Rule 15(1) and Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 were also held impermissible where the show cause notice proposed only a composite penalty under Section 11AC and did not allege distinct grounds for separate penal consequences. The notice could not be expanded beyond its terms, so the additional penalty challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209551