https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100511 A manufacturer claiming abatement under the capacity-based excise scheme had to strictly comply with the mandatory intimation requirements for stoppage and restart of production, including disclosure of the closing stock of ingots and billets. Abatement was correctly denied for the first period because the stoppage and restart communications omitted the closing stock figures, and reliance on RG-1 records could not cure that defect. Abatement was allowed for the second period because timely intimation was given with the meter reading and stock disclosure, and describing the stock in pieces rather than weight did not defeat the statutory object where the factual stoppage and restart were otherwise verified. en-us Fri, 09 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2012 14:53:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100511 A manufacturer claiming abatement under the capacity-based excise scheme had to strictly comply with the mandatory intimation requirements for stoppage and restart of production, including disclosure of the closing stock of ingots and billets. Abatement was correctly denied for the first period because the stoppage and restart communications omitted the closing stock figures, and reliance on RG-1 records could not cure that defect. Abatement was allowed for the second period because timely intimation was given with the meter reading and stock disclosure, and describing the stock in pieces rather than weight did not defeat the statutory object where the factual stoppage and restart were otherwise verified. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100511