https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78053 Fresh show cause proceedings could not be initiated for the same period once the exemption dispute had been finally decided on merits. The earlier Supreme Court ruling had already held that the assessee was not required to prove ownership of the factory to claim exemption under Notification No. 30/81-C.E., and that conclusion had reversed the Tribunal's denial of relief for that period. A general observation in that judgment permitting action "in accordance with law" did not authorise reopening a concluded matter. The demand and appellate order were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals succeeded. en-us Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78053 Fresh show cause proceedings could not be initiated for the same period once the exemption dispute had been finally decided on merits. The earlier Supreme Court ruling had already held that the assessee was not required to prove ownership of the factory to claim exemption under Notification No. 30/81-C.E., and that conclusion had reversed the Tribunal's denial of relief for that period. A general observation in that judgment permitting action "in accordance with law" did not authorise reopening a concluded matter. The demand and appellate order were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78053