https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245980 Under the compounded levy abatement scheme, entitlement depends on continuous factory closure for the prescribed 15-day period, and that closure need not fall within a single calendar month. Denial of abatement solely because the closure period straddled two months was unjustified. Prior payment of duty for the entire month was not an inflexible precondition where intended closure was known in advance; at most, any departure from the usual payment sequence could support interest, not defeat the substantive right to abatement when closure was otherwise established. The demand was set aside and abatement granted with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245980 Under the compounded levy abatement scheme, entitlement depends on continuous factory closure for the prescribed 15-day period, and that closure need not fall within a single calendar month. Denial of abatement solely because the closure period straddled two months was unjustified. Prior payment of duty for the entire month was not an inflexible precondition where intended closure was known in advance; at most, any departure from the usual payment sequence could support interest, not defeat the substantive right to abatement when closure was otherwise established. The demand was set aside and abatement granted with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245980