https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83033 Duty could not be demanded on inputs received under Chapter X while the exemption notification was still operative, because later rescission did not invalidate benefits validly availed during the effective period. The demand was based on an incorrect assumption that Chapter X relief ceased to apply to earlier receipts merely because the notification was withdrawn later. A subsequent restoring notification, given retrospective effect under the retrospective exemption law, covered the affected cases and removed the foundation for the demand. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable, and relief was allowed in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 24 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:16:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83033 Duty could not be demanded on inputs received under Chapter X while the exemption notification was still operative, because later rescission did not invalidate benefits validly availed during the effective period. The demand was based on an incorrect assumption that Chapter X relief ceased to apply to earlier receipts merely because the notification was withdrawn later. A subsequent restoring notification, given retrospective effect under the retrospective exemption law, covered the affected cases and removed the foundation for the demand. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable, and relief was allowed in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83033