https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265765 The High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, ruling that the Assessee was entitled to abatement under the Pan Masala Packing Machines Rules but was liable to pay interest for late duty deposit. The Court emphasized compliance with procedural obligations and clarified that closure for less than 15 days in a month does not disentitle an Assessee to claim abatement. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the CESTAT's order, affirming the decision. en-us Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265765 The High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, ruling that the Assessee was entitled to abatement under the Pan Masala Packing Machines Rules but was liable to pay interest for late duty deposit. The Court emphasized compliance with procedural obligations and clarified that closure for less than 15 days in a month does not disentitle an Assessee to claim abatement. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the CESTAT's order, affirming the decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265765