https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45697 Fresh excise demands for the same goods and period were not barred merely because an earlier demand was withdrawn for failing to apply the concessional rate under the relevant notification. However, Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could apply only where goods were removed in contravention of Rule 9(1); no contravention arose where the authorities had not fixed the time, place and manner of duty payment. Rule 10-A also did not provide a valid recovery basis in the circumstances. The excise demands were therefore quashed. en-us Mon, 25 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:52:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45697 Fresh excise demands for the same goods and period were not barred merely because an earlier demand was withdrawn for failing to apply the concessional rate under the relevant notification. However, Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could apply only where goods were removed in contravention of Rule 9(1); no contravention arose where the authorities had not fixed the time, place and manner of duty payment. Rule 10-A also did not provide a valid recovery basis in the circumstances. The excise demands were therefore quashed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 25 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45697