https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46867 Clearances made under departmental supervision and with the excise department's express permission could not be treated as clandestine removals or removals in contravention of prescribed procedure, so Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was inapplicable. The demand was also time-barred because the show cause notice covered an earlier period and was issued beyond the six-month limitation contemplated by Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On those facts, the notice was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. en-us Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:30:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46867 Clearances made under departmental supervision and with the excise department's express permission could not be treated as clandestine removals or removals in contravention of prescribed procedure, so Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was inapplicable. The demand was also time-barred because the show cause notice covered an earlier period and was issued beyond the six-month limitation contemplated by Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On those facts, the notice was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46867