https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336530 A retrospective validating amendment nullified the exemption and displaced recovery under the general excise notice provisions, so show cause notices and penalty proceedings under Section 11A did not survive for the same amounts. Recovery under Section 154(4) of the Finance Act, 2003 required prior communication of the quantified duty and interest payable, because the statutory thirty-day payment period runs only after such quantified notice; a bare or unquantified letter was insufficient. Interest on the refunded amounts could not be sustained in the form adopted by the department, as recovery had to proceed only within the special validated mechanism and after proper quantification. en-us Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Feb 2018 11:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336530 A retrospective validating amendment nullified the exemption and displaced recovery under the general excise notice provisions, so show cause notices and penalty proceedings under Section 11A did not survive for the same amounts. Recovery under Section 154(4) of the Finance Act, 2003 required prior communication of the quantified duty and interest payable, because the statutory thirty-day payment period runs only after such quantified notice; a bare or unquantified letter was insufficient. Interest on the refunded amounts could not be sustained in the form adopted by the department, as recovery had to proceed only within the special validated mechanism and after proper quantification. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336530