https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349238 Extended limitation was upheld because the earlier proceedings concerned a different brand-name dispute, while the present duty demand arose from a separate SSI exemption issue for another period. Penalty under Section 11AC was sustained because duty short-paid under Section 11A remained distinct from amounts collected from buyers and not deposited under Section 11D; the overlap did not erase the short-payment liability. Interest under Section 11AB was also held payable on the duty demand, limited to the duty component and accruing from the commencement of that provision. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Oct 2017 07:56:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349238 Extended limitation was upheld because the earlier proceedings concerned a different brand-name dispute, while the present duty demand arose from a separate SSI exemption issue for another period. Penalty under Section 11AC was sustained because duty short-paid under Section 11A remained distinct from amounts collected from buyers and not deposited under Section 11D; the overlap did not erase the short-payment liability. Interest under Section 11AB was also held payable on the duty demand, limited to the duty component and accruing from the commencement of that provision. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349238