https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88761 Although the goods were ultimately classifiable under Tariff Item 15A(2), the past-period duty demand could not be enforced because the assessee had cleared the goods in accordance with the jurisdictional authorities' directions and the trade notice issued on the basis of Board clarification. The Department had itself directed classification under Tariff Item 22F and told the assessee to stop availing proforma credit, so a retrospective demand for the earlier period was unsustainable. The equitable principle that the State cannot resile from its own representation was applied, and the demand for the disputed period failed. en-us Fri, 06 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:13:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88761 Although the goods were ultimately classifiable under Tariff Item 15A(2), the past-period duty demand could not be enforced because the assessee had cleared the goods in accordance with the jurisdictional authorities' directions and the trade notice issued on the basis of Board clarification. The Department had itself directed classification under Tariff Item 22F and told the assessee to stop availing proforma credit, so a retrospective demand for the earlier period was unsustainable. The equitable principle that the State cannot resile from its own representation was applied, and the demand for the disputed period failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88761