https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342955 An assessee who elects the compounded levy option under Rule 96ZP(3) cannot simultaneously claim abatement for factory closure under the proviso to Section 3A(3) or seek redetermination under Section 3A(4), because the rule operates as a self-contained duty scheme based on annual capacity and prescribed instalments. On that basis, remission for closure beyond seven days was unavailable and the duty demand was upheld. Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3)(ii) was, however, not sustainable in view of the governing precedent treating that penal provision as invalid, so the penalty was set aside. en-us Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 May 2017 18:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342955 An assessee who elects the compounded levy option under Rule 96ZP(3) cannot simultaneously claim abatement for factory closure under the proviso to Section 3A(3) or seek redetermination under Section 3A(4), because the rule operates as a self-contained duty scheme based on annual capacity and prescribed instalments. On that basis, remission for closure beyond seven days was unavailable and the duty demand was upheld. Penalty under Rule 96ZP(3)(ii) was, however, not sustainable in view of the governing precedent treating that penal provision as invalid, so the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342955