https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110160 A later amendment extending the limitation period for central excise demand was held to operate prospectively, not retrospectively. Because the show cause notice related to a period when the normal limitation under Section 11A was six months, the demand could not be sustained beyond the limitation in force at the relevant time. Where the extended limitation proviso was already found inapplicable, the demand could not be confirmed for a longer period merely because the law was later amended. The demand beyond the six-month period was therefore unsustainable, with consequential relief to the assessee. en-us Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:07:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110160 A later amendment extending the limitation period for central excise demand was held to operate prospectively, not retrospectively. Because the show cause notice related to a period when the normal limitation under Section 11A was six months, the demand could not be sustained beyond the limitation in force at the relevant time. Where the extended limitation proviso was already found inapplicable, the demand could not be confirmed for a longer period merely because the law was later amended. The demand beyond the six-month period was therefore unsustainable, with consequential relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110160