https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44245 The Supreme Court addressed the legality of amendments to Rules 9 and 49, emphasizing the importance of Section 11A in imposing a six-month limitation for demands, even if exceeding this period. The Court directed Revenue to collect dues if notices under Section 11A were served within the time frame. Disputes on notice service were to be resolved by the Assistant Collector. Bank guarantees were deemed available for Revenue to realize dues, and interim orders were modified. Assessees with existing notices were given eight weeks to respond. Appeals were disposed of with no order on costs. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:35:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44245 The Supreme Court addressed the legality of amendments to Rules 9 and 49, emphasizing the importance of Section 11A in imposing a six-month limitation for demands, even if exceeding this period. The Court directed Revenue to collect dues if notices under Section 11A were served within the time frame. Disputes on notice service were to be resolved by the Assistant Collector. Bank guarantees were deemed available for Revenue to realize dues, and interim orders were modified. Assessees with existing notices were given eight weeks to respond. Appeals were disposed of with no order on costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44245