https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193918 Rule 56(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required the seized sample to be tested and the result communicated to the manufacturer so the statutory right to seek re-testing could be exercised within time. Because the test report had not been supplied before the show cause notice was issued, the requirement was treated as a mandatory precondition, not a mere procedural formality. Non-compliance went to the root of the initiation of proceedings, and the notice could not be sustained. The show cause notice was therefore quashed for breach of Rule 56(2). en-us Wed, 27 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Aug 2017 18:51:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193918 Rule 56(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required the seized sample to be tested and the result communicated to the manufacturer so the statutory right to seek re-testing could be exercised within time. Because the test report had not been supplied before the show cause notice was issued, the requirement was treated as a mandatory precondition, not a mere procedural formality. Non-compliance went to the root of the initiation of proceedings, and the notice could not be sustained. The show cause notice was therefore quashed for breach of Rule 56(2). Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193918