https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40438 Central excise recovery was examined under Rule 10 and Rule 10-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Rule 10 was treated as limited to short levy arising from inadvertence, error, collusion, misconstruction, or misstatement, while Rule 10-A operated residually where no specific provision applied. The notice was not confined to Rule 10 and could be supported under Rule 10-A. The Court also distinguished collection entries in the personal ledger account from a final quasi-judicial assessment, holding that assessment and collection are separate and that, where no lawful assessment had been completed at the proper stage, the authorities could lawfully complete assessment after removal of the goods. en-us Wed, 09 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jan 2026 11:01:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40438 Central excise recovery was examined under Rule 10 and Rule 10-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Rule 10 was treated as limited to short levy arising from inadvertence, error, collusion, misconstruction, or misstatement, while Rule 10-A operated residually where no specific provision applied. The notice was not confined to Rule 10 and could be supported under Rule 10-A. The Court also distinguished collection entries in the personal ledger account from a final quasi-judicial assessment, holding that assessment and collection are separate and that, where no lawful assessment had been completed at the proper stage, the authorities could lawfully complete assessment after removal of the goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40438