https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99065 Rule 57F(3) did not impose a sixty-day return requirement for inputs sent to job-workers during the relevant period, and that condition was introduced only later by amendment. The Tribunal held that the amendment could not operate retrospectively and that circulars or trade notices could not add a substantive condition not found in the rule. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable, and Modvat credit was allowed. en-us Thu, 13 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:40:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99065 Rule 57F(3) did not impose a sixty-day return requirement for inputs sent to job-workers during the relevant period, and that condition was introduced only later by amendment. The Tribunal held that the amendment could not operate retrospectively and that circulars or trade notices could not add a substantive condition not found in the rule. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable, and Modvat credit was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99065