https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109809 Affixing labels or stickers on imported medicines was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 30, but the binding Board circular then in force stated that such activity did not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal held that demands raised for periods covered by that circular could not be sustained, because the department was bound by the clarification until it was withdrawn in May 2001. It also held that the retrospective amendment to section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 did not validate these demands, as the matter did not involve approval, acceptance, or assessment under the Act or Rules, but payment authorised by the Board's own clarification. The show cause notices were quashed and the assessee succeeded. en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:28:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109809 Affixing labels or stickers on imported medicines was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 30, but the binding Board circular then in force stated that such activity did not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal held that demands raised for periods covered by that circular could not be sustained, because the department was bound by the clarification until it was withdrawn in May 2001. It also held that the retrospective amendment to section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 did not validate these demands, as the matter did not involve approval, acceptance, or assessment under the Act or Rules, but payment authorised by the Board's own clarification. The show cause notices were quashed and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109809