https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54145 A retrospective amendment to Rule 57CC, inserted by Section 82(1)(b) of the Finance Act, 2005, was treated as supplying the statutory basis for recovering dues for the covered period, so the demand for the disputed month was recoverable. The text also notes that retrospective creation of the recovery mechanism did not erase penalty exposure, because irregular Modvat credit availment was admitted and the penal provisions for such irregular credit were already operative. Accordingly, the commentary states that recovery was validated for the relevant period and the penalty remained undisturbed. en-us Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54145 A retrospective amendment to Rule 57CC, inserted by Section 82(1)(b) of the Finance Act, 2005, was treated as supplying the statutory basis for recovering dues for the covered period, so the demand for the disputed month was recoverable. The text also notes that retrospective creation of the recovery mechanism did not erase penalty exposure, because irregular Modvat credit availment was admitted and the penal provisions for such irregular credit were already operative. Accordingly, the commentary states that recovery was validated for the relevant period and the penalty remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54145