https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51368 Abatement under the compounded levy scheme was available only on strict compliance with Rule 96ZO(2)(a), which required written intimation of factory closure before or on the date of closure. Because the factories closed shortly before midnight and the notices were filed only the next day, the intimation was delayed by one day and did not satisfy the condition precedent. On those admitted facts, the planned closures did not qualify for abatement, and the disallowance was upheld. en-us Wed, 17 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:24:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51368 Abatement under the compounded levy scheme was available only on strict compliance with Rule 96ZO(2)(a), which required written intimation of factory closure before or on the date of closure. Because the factories closed shortly before midnight and the notices were filed only the next day, the intimation was delayed by one day and did not satisfy the condition precedent. On those admitted facts, the planned closures did not qualify for abatement, and the disallowance was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51368