https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94887 A retrospective amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act was treated as curing the basis of the earlier challenge, so the duty demand on pump parts cleared under exemption was sustained notwithstanding approved classification lists and the Cotspun line of reasoning. Separately, Modvat credit was held not to be denyable merely because it was not claimed at the time of clearance under exemption; if otherwise admissible, it could still be allowed subject to verification. The operative effect is that the excise demand remains valid, while credit entitlement depends on factual verification and eligibility. en-us Mon, 17 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:58:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94887 A retrospective amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act was treated as curing the basis of the earlier challenge, so the duty demand on pump parts cleared under exemption was sustained notwithstanding approved classification lists and the Cotspun line of reasoning. Separately, Modvat credit was held not to be denyable merely because it was not claimed at the time of clearance under exemption; if otherwise admissible, it could still be allowed subject to verification. The operative effect is that the excise demand remains valid, while credit entitlement depends on factual verification and eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94887