https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91812 Opting for assessment under Rule 96ZO(3) did not, by itself, bar an assessee from seeking redetermination under Section 3A(4) where the statutory scheme permitted duty to be assessed on actual production. The Tribunal followed an earlier view on the interaction between the two provisions and found that the Commissioner had not undertaken the necessary factual exercise on actual production. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh examination and redetermination of duty liability, with the impugned order set aside and pre-deposit dispensed with. en-us Tue, 18 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:33:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91812 Opting for assessment under Rule 96ZO(3) did not, by itself, bar an assessee from seeking redetermination under Section 3A(4) where the statutory scheme permitted duty to be assessed on actual production. The Tribunal followed an earlier view on the interaction between the two provisions and found that the Commissioner had not undertaken the necessary factual exercise on actual production. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh examination and redetermination of duty liability, with the impugned order set aside and pre-deposit dispensed with. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91812