https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92663 Duty on FRP bodies fitted on jeep chassis could not be demanded retrospectively where the movement of chassis to the body-builder and return after fitment had been specifically approved by excise authorities and that procedure had already attained finality. A later departure from the approved process could operate only prospectively, not as a basis for back-dated duty demand. The demand was also treated as revenue neutral because any duty paid at the intermediate stage would have been available as Modvat credit. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable and was set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2011 12:17:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92663 Duty on FRP bodies fitted on jeep chassis could not be demanded retrospectively where the movement of chassis to the body-builder and return after fitment had been specifically approved by excise authorities and that procedure had already attained finality. A later departure from the approved process could operate only prospectively, not as a basis for back-dated duty demand. The demand was also treated as revenue neutral because any duty paid at the intermediate stage would have been available as Modvat credit. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable and was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92663