https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383393 Substitution of Rule 6(6)(i) of the CENVAT Credit Rules by Notification No. 50/2008-C.E. (N.T.) was treated as a clarificatory amendment with retrospective effect, so the excise duty exemption was available not only to SEZ units but also to SEZ developers. The court followed an earlier coordinate bench view and allied authorities, holding that the later rule change did not operate as a mere prospective amendment. On that basis, the Revenue's appeal was found to lack merit and was dismissed. en-us Mon, 08 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:08:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383393 Substitution of Rule 6(6)(i) of the CENVAT Credit Rules by Notification No. 50/2008-C.E. (N.T.) was treated as a clarificatory amendment with retrospective effect, so the excise duty exemption was available not only to SEZ units but also to SEZ developers. The court followed an earlier coordinate bench view and allied authorities, holding that the later rule change did not operate as a mere prospective amendment. On that basis, the Revenue's appeal was found to lack merit and was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383393