https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93822 Differential duty on parts and accessories of medical equipment was examined in light of Notification No. 116/88-C.E., under which only goods specifically listed in the Table were covered and accessories were exempted only when expressly mentioned. The demand was not disputed on merits. The retrospective amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act by the Finance Bill, 2000-2001 was treated as validating show cause notices issued on approval of classification or price lists, including notices issued within the normal limitation period. On that basis, the demand was treated as not barred by limitation and the appeal was rejected. en-us Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:52:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93822 Differential duty on parts and accessories of medical equipment was examined in light of Notification No. 116/88-C.E., under which only goods specifically listed in the Table were covered and accessories were exempted only when expressly mentioned. The demand was not disputed on merits. The retrospective amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act by the Finance Bill, 2000-2001 was treated as validating show cause notices issued on approval of classification or price lists, including notices issued within the normal limitation period. On that basis, the demand was treated as not barred by limitation and the appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93822