https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52660 CESTAT, Bangalore held that under the compounded levy scheme, duty liability under Rule 96ZP(3) did not continue after a unit had closed and the registration certificate had been surrendered. The dispute was not about abatement during ongoing manufacture, but whether any duty survived once operations had ceased. Reading the Trade Notice as requiring duty only until surrender of registration, the tribunal accepted that liability ended at that point and the assessee was entitled to relief from the demand. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 10:40:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52660 CESTAT, Bangalore held that under the compounded levy scheme, duty liability under Rule 96ZP(3) did not continue after a unit had closed and the registration certificate had been surrendered. The dispute was not about abatement during ongoing manufacture, but whether any duty survived once operations had ceased. Reading the Trade Notice as requiring duty only until surrender of registration, the tribunal accepted that liability ended at that point and the assessee was entitled to relief from the demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52660