https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196651 A substituted service-rule penalty provision operates prospectively unless the amendment clearly indicates retrospective effect, especially where retrospective application would impair rights or create a new penal consequence. Because the charge-sheet was issued before the amendment of Rule 9, the governing regime at the start of proceedings was the unamended rule. The amended rule bifurcated the earlier reduction/reversion penalty into distinct forms, and the punishment imposed was authorised by that amended structure. It was therefore not invalid as a forbidden double penalty. The appellate challenge succeeded, the High Court's interference was set aside, and the disciplinary punishment was restored. en-us Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jul 2023 11:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196651 A substituted service-rule penalty provision operates prospectively unless the amendment clearly indicates retrospective effect, especially where retrospective application would impair rights or create a new penal consequence. Because the charge-sheet was issued before the amendment of Rule 9, the governing regime at the start of proceedings was the unamended rule. The amended rule bifurcated the earlier reduction/reversion penalty into distinct forms, and the punishment imposed was authorised by that amended structure. It was therefore not invalid as a forbidden double penalty. The appellate challenge succeeded, the High Court's interference was set aside, and the disciplinary punishment was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196651