https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278202 Liability under Rule 221 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as an independent statutory obligation attaching to the person who signed the declaration. Mere authorisation under Rule 3 did not extinguish that responsibility, and the liability continued unless displaced by a fresh declaration or specific authorisation. Rule 225 was read as part of the same scheme to show that the rules imposed a continuing and onerous responsibility on the declarant and had to be construed together to reflect legislative intent. The stated conclusion was that Rule 221 liability was not displaced by Rule 3, and the appeals were dismissed. en-us Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278202 Liability under Rule 221 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as an independent statutory obligation attaching to the person who signed the declaration. Mere authorisation under Rule 3 did not extinguish that responsibility, and the liability continued unless displaced by a fresh declaration or specific authorisation. Rule 225 was read as part of the same scheme to show that the rules imposed a continuing and onerous responsibility on the declarant and had to be construed together to reflect legislative intent. The stated conclusion was that Rule 221 liability was not displaced by Rule 3, and the appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278202