https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253110 Fresh Central Excise registration could not be denied to bona fide transferees merely because the earlier occupier's registration had not been cancelled or its dues remained unpaid. The Court held that the excise registration scheme did not authorise refusal on that basis, and directed registration of the petitioners. It also held that section 11E, which creates a first charge, is substantive and cannot operate retrospectively to defeat rights in property acquired before its insertion. As the secured creditor's charge and sale preceded the amendment, the excise authorities could not invoke section 11E to recover the former occupier's dues from the transferred property. en-us Thu, 23 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2015 17:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253110 Fresh Central Excise registration could not be denied to bona fide transferees merely because the earlier occupier's registration had not been cancelled or its dues remained unpaid. The Court held that the excise registration scheme did not authorise refusal on that basis, and directed registration of the petitioners. It also held that section 11E, which creates a first charge, is substantive and cannot operate retrospectively to defeat rights in property acquired before its insertion. As the secured creditor's charge and sale preceded the amendment, the excise authorities could not invoke section 11E to recover the former occupier's dues from the transferred property. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253110