https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102851 A duty demand under Central Excise could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority confirmed liability on a basis not proposed in the show cause notices. The notices proceeded only under Rule 57-S(2)(b), but the demand was ultimately raised by treating the goods as waste and scrap under Rule 57-S(2)(c), without any corresponding allegation in the notices. An adjudication that travels beyond the scope of the notice lacks legal foundation, so the duty demand and consequential penalty were set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 02 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:07:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102851 A duty demand under Central Excise could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority confirmed liability on a basis not proposed in the show cause notices. The notices proceeded only under Rule 57-S(2)(b), but the demand was ultimately raised by treating the goods as waste and scrap under Rule 57-S(2)(c), without any corresponding allegation in the notices. An adjudication that travels beyond the scope of the notice lacks legal foundation, so the duty demand and consequential penalty were set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102851