https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338866 Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 operate in different fields: Section 11AC applies to duty liability arising from fraud, suppression, or intent to evade, while Rule 173Q penalises specified contraventions by the manufacturer, producer, warehouse keeper, or registered dealer. Because the provisions address distinct statutory capacities and misconduct, a composite penalty is not invalid merely because the adjudicating authority did not separately apportion the quantum. The proper course, where bifurcation is not possible on the record, is remand for redetermination of penalty rather than complete deletion. en-us Wed, 08 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338866 Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 operate in different fields: Section 11AC applies to duty liability arising from fraud, suppression, or intent to evade, while Rule 173Q penalises specified contraventions by the manufacturer, producer, warehouse keeper, or registered dealer. Because the provisions address distinct statutory capacities and misconduct, a composite penalty is not invalid merely because the adjudicating authority did not separately apportion the quantum. The proper course, where bifurcation is not possible on the record, is remand for redetermination of penalty rather than complete deletion. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338866