https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124186 Retrospective amendment under the Central Excise/Cenvat scheme created liability to recover the 8% amount on exempted clearances, but the Tribunal held that penal consequences and interest could not be enforced for the prior period when no operative recovery machinery or clear penal mandate existed. Applying the earlier Division Bench view, it set aside penalty and interest on the assessee while maintaining the underlying 8% demand. The Tribunal also held that personal penalty on the director was unsustainable under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 because the demand arose only from the retrospective amendment, and the director's penalty was deleted. en-us Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:28:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124186 Retrospective amendment under the Central Excise/Cenvat scheme created liability to recover the 8% amount on exempted clearances, but the Tribunal held that penal consequences and interest could not be enforced for the prior period when no operative recovery machinery or clear penal mandate existed. Applying the earlier Division Bench view, it set aside penalty and interest on the assessee while maintaining the underlying 8% demand. The Tribunal also held that personal penalty on the director was unsustainable under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 because the demand arose only from the retrospective amendment, and the director's penalty was deleted. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124186