https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167595 Petitioners who had stopped working their centrifugals before the compounded levy scheme was reintroduced and had already cleared the sugar produced before the notification were treated as having a reasonable explanation for not applying to work under the scheme from 1-5-1975. On those facts, the absence of a formal application was not treated as a bar to relief. The operative point is that non-application to the reintroduced scheme did not defeat the claim where the factual circumstances showed the scheme was not being worked and the product had been cleared before the scheme came back into force. en-us Sat, 05 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:31:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167595 Petitioners who had stopped working their centrifugals before the compounded levy scheme was reintroduced and had already cleared the sugar produced before the notification were treated as having a reasonable explanation for not applying to work under the scheme from 1-5-1975. On those facts, the absence of a formal application was not treated as a bar to relief. The operative point is that non-application to the reintroduced scheme did not defeat the claim where the factual circumstances showed the scheme was not being worked and the product had been cleared before the scheme came back into force. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 05 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167595