https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108423 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellants in the challenge against the rejection of their abatement claim for duty due to the closure of the Hot Air Stenter. It held that the closure intimation was timely considering intervening holidays and that the Rule required abatement for the complete closure of the stenter, not all chambers. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to re-examine the rejection, taking into account the holiday period, and granted the appellants a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellants. en-us Tue, 11 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 14:06:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108423 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellants in the challenge against the rejection of their abatement claim for duty due to the closure of the Hot Air Stenter. It held that the closure intimation was timely considering intervening holidays and that the Rule required abatement for the complete closure of the stenter, not all chambers. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to re-examine the rejection, taking into account the holiday period, and granted the appellants a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108423