https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73393 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the Assistant Collector's decision to sanction only a partial refund of excess sugar production under Central Excise Notification No. 132/82. It concluded that the amending Notification No. 193/82 did not have a retrospective effect, denying the appellant's claim for duty concession based on excess sugar production cleared before the amendment. The Tribunal emphasized the presumption of prospective laws and the absence of retrospective intent in the notification language, rejecting the appellant's arguments for retrospective application. en-us Thu, 24 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 May 2011 16:24:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73393 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the Assistant Collector's decision to sanction only a partial refund of excess sugar production under Central Excise Notification No. 132/82. It concluded that the amending Notification No. 193/82 did not have a retrospective effect, denying the appellant's claim for duty concession based on excess sugar production cleared before the amendment. The Tribunal emphasized the presumption of prospective laws and the absence of retrospective intent in the notification language, rejecting the appellant's arguments for retrospective application. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73393