https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74565 Rule 56A(9), as it stood before 15-4-1987, was treated as an unambiguous bar on a manufacturer taking proforma credit under Rule 56A while also availing MODVAT credit under Rule 57A, even for different inputs and final products; the later amendment was not applied retrospectively. On limitation, the record did not establish wilful misstatement or suppression for all notices, so one notice was partly time-barred, two notices were time-barred, and one notice remained within time. Recovery was therefore confined to the enforceable portion of the demand. en-us Thu, 15 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:09:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74565 Rule 56A(9), as it stood before 15-4-1987, was treated as an unambiguous bar on a manufacturer taking proforma credit under Rule 56A while also availing MODVAT credit under Rule 57A, even for different inputs and final products; the later amendment was not applied retrospectively. On limitation, the record did not establish wilful misstatement or suppression for all notices, so one notice was partly time-barred, two notices were time-barred, and one notice remained within time. Recovery was therefore confined to the enforceable portion of the demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74565