https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94875 Clause (e) inserted in the Explanation to Rule 57A(1) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as clarificatory rather than as creating a new entitlement, so it operated retrospectively. On that basis, Modvat credit on accessories remained available even though the credit was taken before the amendment, because the accessories' value had already been included in the value of the final excisable product. The timing objection based only on the date of insertion did not defeat the credit claim, and the order allowing Modvat credit was sustained. en-us Fri, 19 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:25:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94875 Clause (e) inserted in the Explanation to Rule 57A(1) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as clarificatory rather than as creating a new entitlement, so it operated retrospectively. On that basis, Modvat credit on accessories remained available even though the credit was taken before the amendment, because the accessories' value had already been included in the value of the final excisable product. The timing objection based only on the date of insertion did not defeat the credit claim, and the order allowing Modvat credit was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94875