https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328861 Under the compounded levy scheme, revised annual capacity parameters applied only from their stated effective date, so duty for the prior period remained recoverable. The challenge based on limitation was rejected because such recoveries were treated as outside the general time limit under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Penalty and interest under Rule 96ZP could not survive in light of the later binding declaration that the corresponding interest and penalty provisions in Rules 96ZO, 96ZP and 96ZQ were invalid, so those additions were set aside. en-us Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328861 Under the compounded levy scheme, revised annual capacity parameters applied only from their stated effective date, so duty for the prior period remained recoverable. The challenge based on limitation was rejected because such recoveries were treated as outside the general time limit under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Penalty and interest under Rule 96ZP could not survive in light of the later binding declaration that the corresponding interest and penalty provisions in Rules 96ZO, 96ZP and 96ZQ were invalid, so those additions were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328861