https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52648 For clearances made without payment of duty under Notification No. 10/97-C.E. during 1999, the Tribunal held that the Department could not recover 8% under Rule 57CC because the relevant period predated the explanatory provisions later inserted into Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The decision turned on the absence, at the material time, of a specific machinery provision defining the amount payable or prescribing the mode of recovery. Relying on the cited precedent and the later effective dates of the 2001 and 2002 insertions, the Tribunal held the demand unsustainable and allowed the appeals. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 10:20:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52648 For clearances made without payment of duty under Notification No. 10/97-C.E. during 1999, the Tribunal held that the Department could not recover 8% under Rule 57CC because the relevant period predated the explanatory provisions later inserted into Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The decision turned on the absence, at the material time, of a specific machinery provision defining the amount payable or prescribing the mode of recovery. Relying on the cited precedent and the later effective dates of the 2001 and 2002 insertions, the Tribunal held the demand unsustainable and allowed the appeals. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52648