https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77845 Penalty under Rule 96ZO(3) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be imposed for a delay relating to April 1998 because the provision took effect only from 1 May 1998. The court treated the timing of the penal provision as decisive and held that the rule could not operate retrospectively to cover the earlier period. As no substantive question of law arose on that basis, the Revenue's appeal failed. en-us Tue, 12 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77845 Penalty under Rule 96ZO(3) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be imposed for a delay relating to April 1998 because the provision took effect only from 1 May 1998. The court treated the timing of the penal provision as decisive and held that the rule could not operate retrospectively to cover the earlier period. As no substantive question of law arose on that basis, the Revenue's appeal failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77845