https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87183 Excise goods removed under a valid subsisting permission for further processing under Rule 56B could not attract duty at the despatching factory merely because the permission was later withdrawn. The operative principle is that removal without payment of duty remained lawful while the special procedure was in force, and later revocation could not retrospectively fasten duty liability on earlier removals. The demand was therefore unsustainable against the assessee, subject to verification of the fact and quantum of duty paid by the receiving factory. en-us Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:47:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87183 Excise goods removed under a valid subsisting permission for further processing under Rule 56B could not attract duty at the despatching factory merely because the permission was later withdrawn. The operative principle is that removal without payment of duty remained lawful while the special procedure was in force, and later revocation could not retrospectively fasten duty liability on earlier removals. The demand was therefore unsustainable against the assessee, subject to verification of the fact and quantum of duty paid by the receiving factory. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87183