Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether exemption under the notification for 5% ethanol blended petrol could be denied on the ground that duty on the motor spirit component had not been paid before mixing, despite payment within the period prescribed under the payment rule.
Analysis: The exemption applied to the final product, namely 5% ethanol blended petrol, consisting of 95% motor spirit and 5% ethanol, both of which were required to be duty-paid. The motor spirit and ethanol were stored in the refinery premises and the duty on motor spirit was paid within the time permitted under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Once the duty liability stood discharged by payment within the prescribed time, denial of the exemption on the technical ground that payment had not preceded the mixing was unwarranted. The decision relied on the earlier co-ordinate bench view that duty paid by the specified date satisfies the rule.
Conclusion: The exemption could not be denied on the ground urged by the Revenue, and the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the notification.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory payment rule treats duty as duly discharged upon payment by the specified date, an exemption on the final blended product cannot be refused merely because one component was mixed before such payment, if the duty on that component was in fact paid within the prescribed time.