https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45353 Statutory excise liability attached to transferred industrial assets was treated as continuing despite a private sale agreement between the successor and the Corporation. Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was applied to hold that transfer of the undertaking did not extinguish dues linked to the plant, machinery and other excisable assets. The Court distinguished electricity-dues authorities on the basis that tax liability stands on a different footing from contractual charges, and private arrangements cannot override taxing law. Any dispute over ultimate burden between the successor and the Corporation was held unsuitable for resolution in writ proceedings. Recovery against the successor was therefore permitted. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jul 2010 10:39:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45353 Statutory excise liability attached to transferred industrial assets was treated as continuing despite a private sale agreement between the successor and the Corporation. Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was applied to hold that transfer of the undertaking did not extinguish dues linked to the plant, machinery and other excisable assets. The Court distinguished electricity-dues authorities on the basis that tax liability stands on a different footing from contractual charges, and private arrangements cannot override taxing law. Any dispute over ultimate burden between the successor and the Corporation was held unsuitable for resolution in writ proceedings. Recovery against the successor was therefore permitted. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45353