https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200292 Permission granted under Rule 57F(2) for clearance of aluminium waste and scrap remained effective until withdrawn, and a later non-statutory trade notice could not retrospectively defeat that vested entitlement; the duty demand for removals made while permission was in force was therefore unsustainable. The adjudicating authority also lacked jurisdiction to confirm a demand beyond the monetary limit prescribed in the Board's instructions, so the order failed on jurisdictional grounds as well. The appeal was allowed and the demand set aside. en-us Thu, 14 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Mar 2018 18:52:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200292 Permission granted under Rule 57F(2) for clearance of aluminium waste and scrap remained effective until withdrawn, and a later non-statutory trade notice could not retrospectively defeat that vested entitlement; the duty demand for removals made while permission was in force was therefore unsustainable. The adjudicating authority also lacked jurisdiction to confirm a demand beyond the monetary limit prescribed in the Board's instructions, so the order failed on jurisdictional grounds as well. The appeal was allowed and the demand set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200292