TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a small scale re-rolling unit, whose aggregate clearances were below Rs. two crores but which crossed the Rs. 75 lakhs threshold under Notification No. 1/93-C.E., was entitled to deemed credit under the Government of India's Order dated 1-3-1994 without producing duty-paying documents.
Analysis: The relevant notification and deemed credit order were read together with the Central Excise Rules. The order dated 1-3-1994 allowed deemed credit on ingots and re-rollable materials lying in stock on or after 1-4-1994 for re-rollers availing exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E., and expressly dispensed with production of documents evidencing duty payment. The Court followed the consistent view of several High Courts that the trade notice could not restrict the benefit by imposing a Rs. 75 lakhs ceiling contrary to the deemed credit order. Since the assessee's total clearances were below Rs. two crores and it satisfied the conditions of the exemption notification, denial of deemed credit merely because clearances crossed Rs. 75 lakhs was unjustified.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to deemed credit, the demand sustained by the Tribunal was unsustainable, and the substantial question of law was answered in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
TaxTMI 
