https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108806 Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 permits abatement of central excise duty where a factory remains closed for the relevant continuous period, and clause (e) requires a declaration at the time of restarting production confirming that closure. On the facts stated, the manufacturer had informed the department of both closure and restart, and the abatement application itself recorded continuous closure for the claimed periods. That was treated as substantial compliance with clause (e), so the statutory condition was satisfied and the rejection of abatement was unsustainable. en-us Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 18:57:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108806 Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 permits abatement of central excise duty where a factory remains closed for the relevant continuous period, and clause (e) requires a declaration at the time of restarting production confirming that closure. On the facts stated, the manufacturer had informed the department of both closure and restart, and the abatement application itself recorded continuous closure for the claimed periods. That was treated as substantial compliance with clause (e), so the statutory condition was satisfied and the rejection of abatement was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108806