https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111578 Duty-free procurement by a 100% Export-Oriented Undertaking under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. required compliance with the Chapter X procedure, including CT-3 certificates, but liability under Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 remained confined to non-accountal or loss or destruction during transit, handling or storage. Where duty was demanded only because inputs were procured without the approval contemplated by the notification, and none of the Rule 196 contingencies existed, the demand could not be fastened on the recipient undertaking. On the stated reasoning, liability lay against the supplier who cleared goods against an invalid CT-3 certificate, and the demand against the appellants was held unsustainable. en-us Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:40:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111578 Duty-free procurement by a 100% Export-Oriented Undertaking under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. required compliance with the Chapter X procedure, including CT-3 certificates, but liability under Rule 196 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 remained confined to non-accountal or loss or destruction during transit, handling or storage. Where duty was demanded only because inputs were procured without the approval contemplated by the notification, and none of the Rule 196 contingencies existed, the demand could not be fastened on the recipient undertaking. On the stated reasoning, liability lay against the supplier who cleared goods against an invalid CT-3 certificate, and the demand against the appellants was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111578