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 the assessee was entitled to captive consumption exemption on intermediate goods under Notification No. 67/95-C.E. when the final products were cleared under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E., in the light of Rule 6(6)(vii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
Analysis: The intermediate product was used in the manufacture of final products cleared against an exemption available for supplies under international competitive bidding. The exclusion contained in Rule 6(6)(vii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, when read with the proviso to Notification No. 67/95-C.E., protected the assessee's claim for exemption on captive consumption of the intermediate goods. The denial of exemption was therefore unsustainable on the facts found by the Tribunal.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the captive consumption exemption and the demand and penalty were not sustainable.