https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83791 A special Modvat recovery rule was treated as overriding the general notice provision, so notice under Rule 57-I could be issued by the Superintendent as the proper officer. Modvat credit was held unavailable where the final products were not disclosed in the declaration required for availing credit, because the declaration and utilisation rules required the intended final products and use of inputs to be stated. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked absent wilful misstatement, collusion or suppression, and the recovery period was governed by the law in force on the date of notice. en-us Tue, 29 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jul 2011 18:18:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83791 A special Modvat recovery rule was treated as overriding the general notice provision, so notice under Rule 57-I could be issued by the Superintendent as the proper officer. Modvat credit was held unavailable where the final products were not disclosed in the declaration required for availing credit, because the declaration and utilisation rules required the intended final products and use of inputs to be stated. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked absent wilful misstatement, collusion or suppression, and the recovery period was governed by the law in force on the date of notice. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83791