https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793568 Omission of a charging provision and its allied machinery rule, absent any saving clause, operates as repeal and prevents continued recovery proceedings founded solely on those provisions. Applying that principle, the Gujarat HC held that proceedings for excise duty, interest and penalty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act and Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained after their omission, because no saving provision preserved the pending action. The impugned notices, recovery steps and related orders were therefore quashed as lacking jurisdiction once the statutory source of liability had ceased to operate. en-us Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jun 2026 18:07:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793568 Omission of a charging provision and its allied machinery rule, absent any saving clause, operates as repeal and prevents continued recovery proceedings founded solely on those provisions. Applying that principle, the Gujarat HC held that proceedings for excise duty, interest and penalty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act and Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained after their omission, because no saving provision preserved the pending action. The impugned notices, recovery steps and related orders were therefore quashed as lacking jurisdiction once the statutory source of liability had ceased to operate. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793568