https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41713 A later excise notification was treated as prospective only and could not retrospectively impose separate duty on blended yarn already manufactured and consumed before 24.07.1972. The text also states that intra-factory movement of yarn within a continuous manufacturing process was not a separate removal attracting independent levy under the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that basis, the demand lacked legal foundation, and adjustment of duty paid at a later stage against the same demand was described as maintainable where the same manufactured article would otherwise suffer multiple levy. en-us Tue, 06 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jun 2010 15:32:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41713 A later excise notification was treated as prospective only and could not retrospectively impose separate duty on blended yarn already manufactured and consumed before 24.07.1972. The text also states that intra-factory movement of yarn within a continuous manufacturing process was not a separate removal attracting independent levy under the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that basis, the demand lacked legal foundation, and adjustment of duty paid at a later stage against the same demand was described as maintainable where the same manufactured article would otherwise suffer multiple levy. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41713