Compounded levy abatement cannot be refused for technical defects when closure notices and records prove continuous factory shutdown and no production.

Under the compounded levy scheme, abatement of central excise duty could not be denied for technical defects in the closure intimation where the assessee's notices, meter readings and stock particulars objectively showed continuous factory closure and no production. The alleged delay in filing the intimation was not sustainable because submission on the next working day after intervening holidays satisfied the requirement. The Tribunal treated the omission to state continuous closure expressly as a formal defect only, since the accompanying particulars established the factual basis for abatement. The denial of abatement was therefore unjustified and the impugned orders were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether abatement of central excise duty under the compounded levy scheme could be denied for alleged defects in the intimation of factory closure, where the assessee furnished particulars showing continuous closure and no production.

Analysis: The duty liability was being discharged under the compounded levy scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the claim for abatement depended on compliance with the closure intimation requirement under Rule 96ZO. The alleged delay in intimation, in the presence of intervening holidays, was held not sustainable in view of the Tribunal's earlier view that filing on the next working day satisfies the requirement. The objection that the declaration did not expressly state continuous closure was treated as technical, because the intimations contained the time of closure and re-opening, electricity meter readings, and stock particulars. These materials showed that there was no production during the relevant periods.

Conclusion: The abatement claim was valid and the denial of abatement was not justified.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the appeals succeeded with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee's intimation and accompanying particulars objectively establish continuous factory closure and absence of production, abatement under a compounded levy scheme cannot be refused on merely technical defects in the form or timing of the closure notice.

---