https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43512 A duty demand created by an explanation to a notification is valid if it remains within the scope of the parent Act and the existing excise rules; subordinate legislation or executive action cannot go beyond that authority. On the facts, the explanation requiring duty on opening stock of foreign liquor and beer as on 1 April 1980, after deducting duty already charged, was held to operate within the statutory framework and not to impose an unauthorised levy. The challenge therefore failed, and the State demand was sustained. en-us Wed, 30 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:06:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43512 A duty demand created by an explanation to a notification is valid if it remains within the scope of the parent Act and the existing excise rules; subordinate legislation or executive action cannot go beyond that authority. On the facts, the explanation requiring duty on opening stock of foreign liquor and beer as on 1 April 1980, after deducting duty already charged, was held to operate within the statutory framework and not to impose an unauthorised levy. The challenge therefore failed, and the State demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43512