Advance closure intimation under packing machine rules was upheld in substance, securing duty abatement despite a holiday objection.

Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 was applied pragmatically: the advance closure intimation served its purpose of enabling departmental sealing and supervision, and the objection that three working days' notice was not given because one intervening day was a holiday was rejected. The record showed that the departmental officer in fact sealed the factory on the relevant holiday, confirming that the department was able to act within time. On that basis, the notice requirement was treated as satisfied in substance and the conditions for duty abatement were held to have been met.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the respondent was entitled to abatement of duty under Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 despite the Revenue's objection that the closure intimation was not given three working days in advance because the relevant day was a holiday.

Analysis: The purpose of the advance intimation requirement is to enable the Department to seal the packing machines within the stipulated time and ensure supervision during closure. The record showed that the departmental officer himself sealed the factory on the relevant holiday, which demonstrated that the day was not unavailable for departmental action. The notice requirement was therefore satisfied in substance, and the objection that the intimation was invalid merely because one of the intervening days was a holiday was rejected. The conditions of the rule were held to have been met for the purpose of granting abatement.

Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to abatement of duty, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---