https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325214 Where duty demand and penalty were founded solely on Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, they could not survive after that rule was held ultra vires by High Courts. The rule had barred use of Cenvat credit and required cash payment during the default period; once its constitutional validity failed, the basis of the show-cause notice and consequential orders ceased to exist. In the absence of a valid disabling provision, no demand or penalty could be sustained for the disputed period, and the assessee obtained relief. en-us Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325214 Where duty demand and penalty were founded solely on Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, they could not survive after that rule was held ultra vires by High Courts. The rule had barred use of Cenvat credit and required cash payment during the default period; once its constitutional validity failed, the basis of the show-cause notice and consequential orders ceased to exist. In the absence of a valid disabling provision, no demand or penalty could be sustained for the disputed period, and the assessee obtained relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325214