https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261341 The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004's cut-off date of 1 April 2000 for utilising Cenvat credit of additional duty of excise was upheld as a valid fiscal classification. The Bombay HC held that the constitutional provisions on distribution of Union taxes and duties under Articles 270, 271 and 272 operated in a different field from the statutory Cenvat credit scheme, and that the Legislature could limit retrospective credit eligibility by linking it to the date of duty payment. The distinction had a rational basis in the credit mechanism and was not rendered arbitrary merely because related revenue-distribution amendments took effect from an earlier date. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 May 2016 11:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261341 The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004's cut-off date of 1 April 2000 for utilising Cenvat credit of additional duty of excise was upheld as a valid fiscal classification. The Bombay HC held that the constitutional provisions on distribution of Union taxes and duties under Articles 270, 271 and 272 operated in a different field from the statutory Cenvat credit scheme, and that the Legislature could limit retrospective credit eligibility by linking it to the date of duty payment. The distinction had a rational basis in the credit mechanism and was not rendered arbitrary merely because related revenue-distribution amendments took effect from an earlier date. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261341