https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235186 Condition No. 8 of Notification No. 36/96-Cus placed the responsibility on the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise to verify end-use of the imported goods and initiate recovery if the condition was breached. On a plain reading, the recovery mechanism under the notification was therefore vested in that authority and not in the Commissioner of Customs. A show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner of Customs was held to be without jurisdiction, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Wed, 12 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 May 2015 17:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235186 Condition No. 8 of Notification No. 36/96-Cus placed the responsibility on the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise to verify end-use of the imported goods and initiate recovery if the condition was breached. On a plain reading, the recovery mechanism under the notification was therefore vested in that authority and not in the Commissioner of Customs. A show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner of Customs was held to be without jurisdiction, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 12 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235186