https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273256 An excise demand could not be upheld under rule 10-A because the provision lacked statutory support, and it also failed under rule 9(2) because the goods had been cleared with the excise authorities' knowledge after an earlier levy. The transferee of the factory could not claim exemption under Notification No. 131 of 1962, since the excise licence was personal and non-transferable, and the application for a fresh licence was made after the notification's cut-off date. The demand therefore failed, while the exemption claim was rejected on merits. en-us Wed, 22 Mar 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:40:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273256 An excise demand could not be upheld under rule 10-A because the provision lacked statutory support, and it also failed under rule 9(2) because the goods had been cleared with the excise authorities' knowledge after an earlier levy. The transferee of the factory could not claim exemption under Notification No. 131 of 1962, since the excise licence was personal and non-transferable, and the application for a fresh licence was made after the notification's cut-off date. The demand therefore failed, while the exemption claim was rejected on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Mar 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273256