https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45869 The order under challenge was found unsustainable in light of the earlier binding decision relied upon, and the matter was required to be reconsidered because the respondent had filed a declaration under the proviso to Rule 96ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The claim was therefore not finally concluded on the merits, and the appropriate authority was directed to examine the declaration and decide the matter in accordance with law. The challenged order was set aside and the appeals were allowed, with fresh consideration ordered. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:01:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45869 The order under challenge was found unsustainable in light of the earlier binding decision relied upon, and the matter was required to be reconsidered because the respondent had filed a declaration under the proviso to Rule 96ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The claim was therefore not finally concluded on the merits, and the appropriate authority was directed to examine the declaration and decide the matter in accordance with law. The challenged order was set aside and the appeals were allowed, with fresh consideration ordered. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45869