https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99323 Proceedings initiated under omitted Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules could not continue after the rule was deleted where the amending instrument contained no saving clause. The governing principle applied was that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 does not, by itself, preserve proceedings under an omitted rule in the absence of an express saving provision. Because the omission of Rule 10 in 1980 was not accompanied by any saving language, and the insertion of Section 11A did not save pending matters, the show-cause notice and consequent adjudication under the omitted rule could not stand. en-us Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:42:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99323 Proceedings initiated under omitted Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules could not continue after the rule was deleted where the amending instrument contained no saving clause. The governing principle applied was that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 does not, by itself, preserve proceedings under an omitted rule in the absence of an express saving provision. Because the omission of Rule 10 in 1980 was not accompanied by any saving language, and the insertion of Section 11A did not save pending matters, the show-cause notice and consequent adjudication under the omitted rule could not stand. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99323