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 forgings cleared to the principal manufacturer without payment of duty, though duty was ultimately discharged by the principal manufacturer, could be treated as exempted goods so as to attract reversal of common credit under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
Analysis: The common input and input service credit was denied on the premise that the job-worked forgings cleared without payment of duty were exempted goods. The Tribunal found that the goods cleared to the principal manufacturer had suffered duty at the hands of the principal manufacturer, and therefore the job-work clearances could not be characterised as exempted goods. Once the final product was duty paid, the bar against credit on exempted goods did not apply. The Tribunal relied on the settled principle that where an intermediate or job-worked product is ultimately used in the manufacture of a duty-paid final product, credit cannot be denied merely because duty was not paid at the job-worker's stage.
Conclusion: Rule 6 was held to be inapplicable and the appellant was not liable to reverse the credit. The demand, interest and penalties could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded because the job-work clearances were not exempted goods in law once duty was paid on the final product by the principal manufacturer.
Ratio Decidendi: Credit on common inputs is not barred where goods cleared without duty at the job-worker stage are ultimately used in the manufacture of a duty-paid final product, because such clearances do not constitute exempted goods for Rule 6 purposes.