<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2000 (6) TMI 44 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48807</link>
    <description>An amendment to Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 that created an exception for clearances to Free Trade Zone units and hundred per cent Export Oriented Units was treated as a substantive change to the Modvat credit regime, not a mere clarification. Because the notification contained no express retrospective wording and stated that it would come into force on publication in the Official Gazette, the amended rule applied only from 1-3-1992 onward. The earlier period could not claim the benefit of the new exception, and the substantive fiscal change was held to operate prospectively unless retrospectivity is clearly provided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2019 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87287" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (6) TMI 44 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48807</link>
      <description>An amendment to Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 that created an exception for clearances to Free Trade Zone units and hundred per cent Export Oriented Units was treated as a substantive change to the Modvat credit regime, not a mere clarification. Because the notification contained no express retrospective wording and stated that it would come into force on publication in the Official Gazette, the amended rule applied only from 1-3-1992 onward. The earlier period could not claim the benefit of the new exception, and the substantive fiscal change was held to operate prospectively unless retrospectivity is clearly provided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>