https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752804 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal and set aside the demand for central excise duty on resin clearance. The appellant was exempted from duty under N/N. 03/2005 until 28.02.2006, when N/N. 07/2006 withdrew the exemption. However, the withdrawal notification was challenged and remained sub judice until Uttarakhand HC's decision on 10.07.2019. Since no duty was collected from buyers during the disputed period and SCNs from 2007-2014 were adjudicated only in 2020, violating the 6-month statutory timeline under Section 11A(11) of Central Excise Act, the demand was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 May 2024 18:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752804 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal and set aside the demand for central excise duty on resin clearance. The appellant was exempted from duty under N/N. 03/2005 until 28.02.2006, when N/N. 07/2006 withdrew the exemption. However, the withdrawal notification was challenged and remained sub judice until Uttarakhand HC's decision on 10.07.2019. Since no duty was collected from buyers during the disputed period and SCNs from 2007-2014 were adjudicated only in 2020, violating the 6-month statutory timeline under Section 11A(11) of Central Excise Act, the demand was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752804