IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. GCR No.8 of 2003 Date of Decision:22.03.2010 Commissioner of Central Excise II, Chandigarh ....Petitioner Versus M/s Sharomani Alloys & Steel Castings (P) Ltd. and others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel(Indirect Taxes), for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (ORAL) The Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for adjudication by this Court:- “Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the sending of notice of closure/restart of production by the assessee to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner was sufficient compliance of Clauses (b) and (d) of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 96 ZO of the Central Excise, 1944?” Learned counsel for the revenue has fairly acknowledged that the aforementioned question of law stands squarely answered by this Court in GCR No.9 of 2004 titled as M/s Midland Alloys Vs. CCE Chandigarh, decided on 17.3.2010. In view of the above, this reference is accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in the same terms as in aforementioned GCR No.9 of 2004. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE 22.3.2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) AS JUDGE