https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47762 The court upheld the constitutionality of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the validity of the rules and notifications issued thereunder. It ruled that the petitioner, having opted for the lump-sum payment scheme under Rule 96ZO(3), could not later seek determination based on actual production or claim abatement for periods of closure. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with the court not opining on other claims pending before the Tribunal. en-us Mon, 08 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47762 The court upheld the constitutionality of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the validity of the rules and notifications issued thereunder. It ruled that the petitioner, having opted for the lump-sum payment scheme under Rule 96ZO(3), could not later seek determination based on actual production or claim abatement for periods of closure. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with the court not opining on other claims pending before the Tribunal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47762