https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92796 An approved classification list, once acted upon, could not be reopened to support retrospective duty recovery where the department had not invoked the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A. The reassessment therefore operated only prospectively, and past-period demands based on reclassification were not sustainable. Because the Modvat credit utilisation flowed directly from that approved classification, it was not an independent basis for a separate recovery demand. The credit consequence also could not be split off to justify retrospective liability. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee succeeded. en-us Mon, 08 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Nov 2011 11:41:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92796 An approved classification list, once acted upon, could not be reopened to support retrospective duty recovery where the department had not invoked the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A. The reassessment therefore operated only prospectively, and past-period demands based on reclassification were not sustainable. Because the Modvat credit utilisation flowed directly from that approved classification, it was not an independent basis for a separate recovery demand. The credit consequence also could not be split off to justify retrospective liability. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92796