Strict compliance under excise abatement rules required; failure to furnish closure-date details defeated the relief claim.

Abatement of excise duty under the compounded levy scheme was available only on strict compliance with Rule 96ZO(2), including furnishing the prescribed particulars of finished goods and raw material on the date of closure. Failure to supply that mandatory information disentitled the assessee to relief. The argument that meter reading could not be provided because the meter was sealed did not excuse non-compliance with the rule's conditions. The claim for abatement was therefore rejected, and the issue was resolved in favour of the revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether abatement of excise duty under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be claimed on the basis of substantial compliance despite non-compliance with the prescribed conditions.

Analysis: Abatement under the compounded levy scheme was available only if the conditions prescribed by Rule 96ZO(2) were satisfied. The assessee failed to furnish the required information regarding finished goods and raw material on the date of closure, which was a necessary condition for relief. The contention that meter reading could not be supplied because the meter was sealed did not cure the non-compliance with the mandatory requirements.

Conclusion: The claim for abatement was rightly rejected, and the questions were answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

---