https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80796 Show cause notices for post-20-2-1982 excise duty demands were held not invalid merely because they invoked Section 51(2)(d) of the Finance Act, 1982 instead of Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, since the notices were within limitation and the required procedural steps under Section 11A had been followed. The wrong citation was treated as a curable defect, not a jurisdictional failure. The remand for reconsideration of duty on yarn cleared outside the factory and on waste yarn was also unsustainable because no adequate basis was shown for it; any adjustment for exempt or refundable amounts had to be pursued through the statutory refund process. The demand notices were upheld and the remand set aside. en-us Thu, 28 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:48:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80796 Show cause notices for post-20-2-1982 excise duty demands were held not invalid merely because they invoked Section 51(2)(d) of the Finance Act, 1982 instead of Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, since the notices were within limitation and the required procedural steps under Section 11A had been followed. The wrong citation was treated as a curable defect, not a jurisdictional failure. The remand for reconsideration of duty on yarn cleared outside the factory and on waste yarn was also unsustainable because no adequate basis was shown for it; any adjustment for exempt or refundable amounts had to be pursued through the statutory refund process. The demand notices were upheld and the remand set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80796