https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33301 Sections 11AC and 11AB of the Central Excise Act could not be applied to conduct relating to a period before those provisions came into force on 28.09.1996, so retrospective penalty and interest under those sections were impermissible. However, penalty could still be sustained under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules because that rule independently authorised penalty for the same conduct, and the amount imposed was supported by that framework. The personal penalty on the Managing Director under Rule 209A was also restored on the basis of participation in duty evasion, and prior leniency in another matter did not prevent fresh penalty for a subsequent offence. en-us Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33301 Sections 11AC and 11AB of the Central Excise Act could not be applied to conduct relating to a period before those provisions came into force on 28.09.1996, so retrospective penalty and interest under those sections were impermissible. However, penalty could still be sustained under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules because that rule independently authorised penalty for the same conduct, and the amount imposed was supported by that framework. The personal penalty on the Managing Director under Rule 209A was also restored on the basis of participation in duty evasion, and prior leniency in another matter did not prevent fresh penalty for a subsequent offence. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33301