https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83206 Modvat-credited inputs removed as such attracted duty under the then-existing Rule 57F(1)(ii), because the rule required payment as if the inputs had been manufactured in the receiving factory. A later amendment capping liability by reference to the credit taken was treated as beneficial, not clarificatory, and was therefore not applied retrospectively. Reversal of Modvat credit alone was rejected as sufficient compliance. The penalty under Rule 173Q was upheld in principle because duty was not discharged in the prescribed manner, but it was reduced as excessive in the circumstances. en-us Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:52:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83206 Modvat-credited inputs removed as such attracted duty under the then-existing Rule 57F(1)(ii), because the rule required payment as if the inputs had been manufactured in the receiving factory. A later amendment capping liability by reference to the credit taken was treated as beneficial, not clarificatory, and was therefore not applied retrospectively. Reversal of Modvat credit alone was rejected as sufficient compliance. The penalty under Rule 173Q was upheld in principle because duty was not discharged in the prescribed manner, but it was reduced as excessive in the circumstances. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83206