https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50481 Amended Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules withdrew the power to extend the time for receipt of goods sent to job workers, and the request had to be tested on the date the benefit was sought. An extension application made after the amendment could not be granted because the Assistant Commissioner no longer retained authority under the amended rule. Earlier authorities were treated as distinguishable, and the Larger Bench view on application of amended procedural provisions was followed. The practical effect was that claims for extension filed after the amendment failed, even where the goods had been sent before the change. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2010 10:21:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50481 Amended Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules withdrew the power to extend the time for receipt of goods sent to job workers, and the request had to be tested on the date the benefit was sought. An extension application made after the amendment could not be granted because the Assistant Commissioner no longer retained authority under the amended rule. Earlier authorities were treated as distinguishable, and the Larger Bench view on application of amended procedural provisions was followed. The practical effect was that claims for extension filed after the amendment failed, even where the goods had been sent before the change. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50481