https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208751 The Court directed the Central Excise authorities to consider the registration valid from 8 July 2004 for the Petitioners' new premises, validating invoices issued during that period. Despite the Petitioners' failure to obtain fresh registration upon shifting business premises, the Court deemed the breach technical due to substantial compliance and absence of fraudulent intent. The Court emphasized the mandatory nature of Rule 9 but ultimately ruled in favor of the Petitioners, making the rule absolute without costs. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208751 The Court directed the Central Excise authorities to consider the registration valid from 8 July 2004 for the Petitioners' new premises, validating invoices issued during that period. Despite the Petitioners' failure to obtain fresh registration upon shifting business premises, the Court deemed the breach technical due to substantial compliance and absence of fraudulent intent. The Court emphasized the mandatory nature of Rule 9 but ultimately ruled in favor of the Petitioners, making the rule absolute without costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208751