https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73169 Differential excise duty on aluminium foil scrap could not be recovered retrospectively under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 where the earlier assessment had been made under departmental directions and the later demand reflected only a change of opinion rather than a true short levy. The demand notice was also invalid because the fresh demand covered a period beyond the six-month limitation under Rule 10 and was not duly confirmed in the manner required by law. Recovery for the past period was therefore barred, while assessment at the crude rate from the date of the trade notice remained undisturbed. en-us Wed, 01 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 May 2011 15:13:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73169 Differential excise duty on aluminium foil scrap could not be recovered retrospectively under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 where the earlier assessment had been made under departmental directions and the later demand reflected only a change of opinion rather than a true short levy. The demand notice was also invalid because the fresh demand covered a period beyond the six-month limitation under Rule 10 and was not duly confirmed in the manner required by law. Recovery for the past period was therefore barred, while assessment at the crude rate from the date of the trade notice remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73169