https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54262 An amendment enlarging the permitted use of Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4) was treated as prospective because it expanded the substantive facility rather than merely clarifying an existing entitlement. On that reasoning, credit earned on tin plates was not available for payment of duty on paper drums for periods before 16-3-1995, and duty was required to be paid from PLA with corresponding re-credit of any reversed amount in the Modvat account. Penalty was considered unjustified because the dispute arose from a bona fide interpretative controversy on the scope and timing of the amendment. The retrospectivity question was referred to a Larger Bench for authoritative resolution. en-us Fri, 02 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54262 An amendment enlarging the permitted use of Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4) was treated as prospective because it expanded the substantive facility rather than merely clarifying an existing entitlement. On that reasoning, credit earned on tin plates was not available for payment of duty on paper drums for periods before 16-3-1995, and duty was required to be paid from PLA with corresponding re-credit of any reversed amount in the Modvat account. Penalty was considered unjustified because the dispute arose from a bona fide interpretative controversy on the scope and timing of the amendment. The retrospectivity question was referred to a Larger Bench for authoritative resolution. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54262