https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121544 A show cause notice based on rules that had already been substituted before the notice date could not sustain the excise demand or penalty. The notice invoked Rule 57S(1)(ii) read with Rule 57Q and Rule 51A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, even though those provisions had been replaced by the Cenvat Rules. Retrospective application of the substituted provisions was rejected, and reliance on retrospective construction of an exemption notification was held inapposite because the demand was not founded on the new provision. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:39:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121544 A show cause notice based on rules that had already been substituted before the notice date could not sustain the excise demand or penalty. The notice invoked Rule 57S(1)(ii) read with Rule 57Q and Rule 51A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, even though those provisions had been replaced by the Cenvat Rules. Retrospective application of the substituted provisions was rejected, and reliance on retrospective construction of an exemption notification was held inapposite because the demand was not founded on the new provision. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121544