https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77859 Concessional duty for dyed yarn under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. depended on the condition that specified Modvat credit had not been availed in the dyeing process. Because the dyeing machinery had been taken over after the predecessor owner had already availed and exhausted capital goods credit under Rule 57Q, the machinery was treated as one in respect of which credit had been availed, and the appellant could not satisfy the exemption condition. The later amendment by Notification No. 29/2000-C.E. only renumbered the credit-rule references and did not alter the substance of the restriction. The denial of exemption was therefore upheld. en-us Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77859 Concessional duty for dyed yarn under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. depended on the condition that specified Modvat credit had not been availed in the dyeing process. Because the dyeing machinery had been taken over after the predecessor owner had already availed and exhausted capital goods credit under Rule 57Q, the machinery was treated as one in respect of which credit had been availed, and the appellant could not satisfy the exemption condition. The later amendment by Notification No. 29/2000-C.E. only renumbered the credit-rule references and did not alter the substance of the restriction. The denial of exemption was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77859