https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118426 Denial of exemption under Notification No. 34/02-CE was questioned because the adjudicating authority had not considered Notification No. 47/2001-C.E. (N.T.) governing inter-warehouse movement of petroleum products. The goods were stated to have been moved through pipeline, warehoused at one terminal, and rewarehoused at another, so the applicability of the later notification was material to the duty position. As that notification had not been examined, the existing order could not be finally sustained. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication, with opportunity to the assessee to place its defence. No final ruling was given on substantive exemption entitlement. en-us Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:49:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118426 Denial of exemption under Notification No. 34/02-CE was questioned because the adjudicating authority had not considered Notification No. 47/2001-C.E. (N.T.) governing inter-warehouse movement of petroleum products. The goods were stated to have been moved through pipeline, warehoused at one terminal, and rewarehoused at another, so the applicability of the later notification was material to the duty position. As that notification had not been examined, the existing order could not be finally sustained. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication, with opportunity to the assessee to place its defence. No final ruling was given on substantive exemption entitlement. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118426