https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459993 Duty under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act was upheld, as the Tribunal found that the assessee acted on departmental clarifications and permissions and that the restriction on MODVAT/CENVAT credit linked to Section 3A did not apply on the facts. The contrary basis for demanding duty under Section 3A was rejected. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable for want of supporting material, so the demand could not be sustained on that footing. Consequential penalties under the Central Excise Rules, Section 11AC, Rule 96ZO(3) and Rule 96ZP(3) were set aside, including the view that mandatory penalties without statutory authority are impermissible. en-us Thu, 20 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jan 2025 13:16:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459993 Duty under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act was upheld, as the Tribunal found that the assessee acted on departmental clarifications and permissions and that the restriction on MODVAT/CENVAT credit linked to Section 3A did not apply on the facts. The contrary basis for demanding duty under Section 3A was rejected. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable for want of supporting material, so the demand could not be sustained on that footing. Consequential penalties under the Central Excise Rules, Section 11AC, Rule 96ZO(3) and Rule 96ZP(3) were set aside, including the view that mandatory penalties without statutory authority are impermissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459993