https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50333 Excise duty recovery was discussed as dependent on a statutory Section 11A notice served within the prescribed six-month period; RT-12 return entries could not replace that notice, and a demand for a much earlier period fell outside limitation. The analysis also states that interest on alleged duty dues requires express statutory authority and cannot be supported merely by an interim writ order, particularly where Article 265 is engaged. On that basis, the commentary concludes that the duty demand and consequential interest claim were unsustainable. en-us Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:35:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50333 Excise duty recovery was discussed as dependent on a statutory Section 11A notice served within the prescribed six-month period; RT-12 return entries could not replace that notice, and a demand for a much earlier period fell outside limitation. The analysis also states that interest on alleged duty dues requires express statutory authority and cannot be supported merely by an interim writ order, particularly where Article 265 is engaged. On that basis, the commentary concludes that the duty demand and consequential interest claim were unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50333