https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269501 The commentary explains that where a central excise duty demand is remanded for redetermination, the related penalty under section 11AC may also remain open, and the Tribunal may cap the penalty at a specified percentage of the duty demand when the governing provision confers discretion. It further notes that, once section 11AC was later substituted by the Finance Act, 2011, the controversy over the Tribunal's power became academic. The discussion therefore treats the Tribunal's approach as legally supportable in the circumstances and highlights the limited scope for interference when penalty follows a remanded demand. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 May 2016 14:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269501 The commentary explains that where a central excise duty demand is remanded for redetermination, the related penalty under section 11AC may also remain open, and the Tribunal may cap the penalty at a specified percentage of the duty demand when the governing provision confers discretion. It further notes that, once section 11AC was later substituted by the Finance Act, 2011, the controversy over the Tribunal's power became academic. The discussion therefore treats the Tribunal's approach as legally supportable in the circumstances and highlights the limited scope for interference when penalty follows a remanded demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269501