https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51172 Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, as amended, was treated as empowering a Central Excise Officer to issue a show cause notice even in cases alleging fraud, suppression and wilful misdeclaration; the objection based on earlier law and the Board circular failed. The compounded levy scheme under Section 3A and the 1997 Capacity Determination Rules was treated as a statutory tax mechanism, not an optional contractual arrangement, so the assessee could not withdraw mid-year on principles of offer and acceptance. On the evidence, the change in factor 'd' of Rolling Mill 'B' was proved only from the first week of November 1997, so duty was recomputed from that date and the penalty was reduced. en-us Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:33:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51172 Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, as amended, was treated as empowering a Central Excise Officer to issue a show cause notice even in cases alleging fraud, suppression and wilful misdeclaration; the objection based on earlier law and the Board circular failed. The compounded levy scheme under Section 3A and the 1997 Capacity Determination Rules was treated as a statutory tax mechanism, not an optional contractual arrangement, so the assessee could not withdraw mid-year on principles of offer and acceptance. On the evidence, the change in factor 'd' of Rolling Mill 'B' was proved only from the first week of November 1997, so duty was recomputed from that date and the penalty was reduced. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51172