https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168686 Retrospective effect was sought to be given to Notification No. 22 of 1982 under Section 52 of the Finance Act, 1982, raising the question whether duty liability on matches could be altered so as to affect claims arising from an earlier mandamus. The constitutionality of the retrospective scheme and the new concessional duty criteria was also questioned under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g), along with an objection that the measure encroached on judicial power. The Judges differed on the validity of Section 52 and the notification, and the matter was placed before a Bench of three Judges. en-us Tue, 25 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2015 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168686 Retrospective effect was sought to be given to Notification No. 22 of 1982 under Section 52 of the Finance Act, 1982, raising the question whether duty liability on matches could be altered so as to affect claims arising from an earlier mandamus. The constitutionality of the retrospective scheme and the new concessional duty criteria was also questioned under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g), along with an objection that the measure encroached on judicial power. The Judges differed on the validity of Section 52 and the notification, and the matter was placed before a Bench of three Judges. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 25 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168686