https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78823 Written notice to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner was sufficient compliance with clauses (b) and (d) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because the manufacturer's duty was only to intimate the competent officer about closure of the unit for a period or the proposed restart after that period. The Court treated such intimation as meeting the prescribed procedural requirement and answered the issue in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:00:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78823 Written notice to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner was sufficient compliance with clauses (b) and (d) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because the manufacturer's duty was only to intimate the competent officer about closure of the unit for a period or the proposed restart after that period. The Court treated such intimation as meeting the prescribed procedural requirement and answered the issue in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78823