https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271931 Abatement of duty could not be denied for minor procedural lapses where the closing stock was reflected in the RG-1 register and monthly returns, the intimation of resumption was filed on the next working day after a weekend, and the closure period was otherwise ascertainable from the intimations. The procedural requirements were substantially complied with, the department was aware of the continuous closure, and omission to specify the closing stock or the full closure period did not justify rejection. The abatement claim was therefore entitled to be allowed and the refusal to grant it was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271931 Abatement of duty could not be denied for minor procedural lapses where the closing stock was reflected in the RG-1 register and monthly returns, the intimation of resumption was filed on the next working day after a weekend, and the closure period was otherwise ascertainable from the intimations. The procedural requirements were substantially complied with, the department was aware of the continuous closure, and omission to specify the closing stock or the full closure period did not justify rejection. The abatement claim was therefore entitled to be allowed and the refusal to grant it was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271931