https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172813 A retrospective amendment to Notification No. 33/99-CE was treated as excluding the CENVAT credit component from the refund scheme, so refund entitlement had to be computed after deducting the credit available under the scheme, not merely credit actually utilised. On that basis, refunds granted in excess of the amended entitlement were held recoverable under the express recovery provision in Section 153(4) of the Finance Act, 2003. The court also rejected revenue-neutrality and equitable arguments, and held that the suggested debit of the CENVAT account was neither factually possible nor legally permissible on the relevant dates. en-us Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172813 A retrospective amendment to Notification No. 33/99-CE was treated as excluding the CENVAT credit component from the refund scheme, so refund entitlement had to be computed after deducting the credit available under the scheme, not merely credit actually utilised. On that basis, refunds granted in excess of the amended entitlement were held recoverable under the express recovery provision in Section 153(4) of the Finance Act, 2003. The court also rejected revenue-neutrality and equitable arguments, and held that the suggested debit of the CENVAT account was neither factually possible nor legally permissible on the relevant dates. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172813