https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90957 Section 3A(4) was treated as prevailing over Rule 96ZO(3), so an assessee who had opted for duty payment under the rule could still seek determination of duty on the basis of actual production. The Tribunal distinguished authority dealing only with the vires of Section 3A and held that it did not answer the narrower question of continued entitlement under Section 3A(4). The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:48:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90957 Section 3A(4) was treated as prevailing over Rule 96ZO(3), so an assessee who had opted for duty payment under the rule could still seek determination of duty on the basis of actual production. The Tribunal distinguished authority dealing only with the vires of Section 3A and held that it did not answer the narrower question of continued entitlement under Section 3A(4). The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90957