https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85368 An exemption notification for room air conditioners carried its own procedural requirements and consequences for non-compliance, so Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not the governing recovery provision for alleged wrongful use. The scheme of Chapter X was aimed at remission of duty on inputs, while the notification only incorporated Chapter X procedure to the extent relevant to removal, transport, receipt and utilisation. A duty demand raised about two and a half years later was also unsustainable under the limitation rule because the goods had been installed and certified, the bond had been discharged, and no suppression or similar ground was pleaded and proved. en-us Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:54:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85368 An exemption notification for room air conditioners carried its own procedural requirements and consequences for non-compliance, so Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not the governing recovery provision for alleged wrongful use. The scheme of Chapter X was aimed at remission of duty on inputs, while the notification only incorporated Chapter X procedure to the extent relevant to removal, transport, receipt and utilisation. A duty demand raised about two and a half years later was also unsustainable under the limitation rule because the goods had been installed and certified, the bond had been discharged, and no suppression or similar ground was pleaded and proved. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85368