https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75028 Credit taken and utilised on inputs while final products were still dutiable was not required to be reversed merely because the products later became exempt under an exemption notification. The Tribunal applied its earlier view, based on the Larger Bench principle, that credit lawfully earned and used during the dutiable period remains indefeasible. The relevant inputs included stock, work-in-process, and finished goods held when exemption was opted for, but subsequent exemption did not create a retrospective reversal liability. en-us Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75028 Credit taken and utilised on inputs while final products were still dutiable was not required to be reversed merely because the products later became exempt under an exemption notification. The Tribunal applied its earlier view, based on the Larger Bench principle, that credit lawfully earned and used during the dutiable period remains indefeasible. The relevant inputs included stock, work-in-process, and finished goods held when exemption was opted for, but subsequent exemption did not create a retrospective reversal liability. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75028