https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117881 In proceedings against a 100% Export Oriented Unit for alleged removal of bonded goods, duty demand could not be sustained unless the alleged violation was first brought to the notice of the Development Commissioner under the governing Board circulars. The Tribunal read Circular No. 21/95-Cus. and Circular No. 122/95-Cus. together and held that the later circular did not amend or override the earlier clarification. As no reference had been made to the Development Commissioner or the Board of Approval before or after the notice, the demand proceedings and connected penalties were set aside, and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:54:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117881 In proceedings against a 100% Export Oriented Unit for alleged removal of bonded goods, duty demand could not be sustained unless the alleged violation was first brought to the notice of the Development Commissioner under the governing Board circulars. The Tribunal read Circular No. 21/95-Cus. and Circular No. 122/95-Cus. together and held that the later circular did not amend or override the earlier clarification. As no reference had been made to the Development Commissioner or the Board of Approval before or after the notice, the demand proceedings and connected penalties were set aside, and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117881