https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388050 Rule 11(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, inserted from 01.03.2007, was held not to operate retrospectively to require reversal of CENVAT credit where the final products had already become absolutely exempt; in the absence of express retrospective intent, the later reversal provision could not govern prior credit, so the demand for reversal, interest and penalties failed. Credit transfer to a successor unit under Rule 10(3) was also upheld where the entire business, assets and manufacturing operations had been transferred and the contrary allegation of non-transfer of inputs or capital goods was unsupported by evidence, so denial of the transferred credit was unjustified. en-us Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 16:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388050 Rule 11(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, inserted from 01.03.2007, was held not to operate retrospectively to require reversal of CENVAT credit where the final products had already become absolutely exempt; in the absence of express retrospective intent, the later reversal provision could not govern prior credit, so the demand for reversal, interest and penalties failed. Credit transfer to a successor unit under Rule 10(3) was also upheld where the entire business, assets and manufacturing operations had been transferred and the contrary allegation of non-transfer of inputs or capital goods was unsupported by evidence, so denial of the transferred credit was unjustified. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388050