https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357989 Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 was applied pragmatically: the advance closure intimation served its purpose of enabling departmental sealing and supervision, and the objection that three working days' notice was not given because one intervening day was a holiday was rejected. The record showed that the departmental officer in fact sealed the factory on the relevant holiday, confirming that the department was able to act within time. On that basis, the notice requirement was treated as satisfied in substance and the conditions for duty abatement were held to have been met. en-us Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357989 Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 was applied pragmatically: the advance closure intimation served its purpose of enabling departmental sealing and supervision, and the objection that three working days' notice was not given because one intervening day was a holiday was rejected. The record showed that the departmental officer in fact sealed the factory on the relevant holiday, confirming that the department was able to act within time. On that basis, the notice requirement was treated as satisfied in substance and the conditions for duty abatement were held to have been met. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357989