https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87384 Waste and scrap cleared during the relevant period remained covered by Notification No. 172/84-C.E. because the exemption was in force and its conditions were satisfied. Rule 57F(4) was read as requiring removal on payment of the appropriate duty, and where the applicable duty under the notification was nil, clearance complied with the rule. The later notification withdrawing the exemption for cases where credit had been taken operated only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively. The duty demand on the scrap was therefore not sustainable. en-us Fri, 08 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:18:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87384 Waste and scrap cleared during the relevant period remained covered by Notification No. 172/84-C.E. because the exemption was in force and its conditions were satisfied. Rule 57F(4) was read as requiring removal on payment of the appropriate duty, and where the applicable duty under the notification was nil, clearance complied with the rule. The later notification withdrawing the exemption for cases where credit had been taken operated only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively. The duty demand on the scrap was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87384