https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45096 Gate passes alone were insufficient to prove that assessment and duty payment had already been completed before the demand notices issued. In the writ proceedings, the burden remained on the appellants to affirmatively establish prior assessment, and that fact was not proved on the material before the High Court. The notices were therefore not shown to be time-barred under Rule 10, and the matter was properly treated as falling under Rule 10A. The challenge based on limitation failed, and the application of Rule 10A was upheld. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:53:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45096 Gate passes alone were insufficient to prove that assessment and duty payment had already been completed before the demand notices issued. In the writ proceedings, the burden remained on the appellants to affirmatively establish prior assessment, and that fact was not proved on the material before the High Court. The notices were therefore not shown to be time-barred under Rule 10, and the matter was properly treated as falling under Rule 10A. The challenge based on limitation failed, and the application of Rule 10A was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45096