https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80388 Defective cut tubes and cut tyres cleared as waste were treated as waste or by-product arising during the manufacturing process, so the input-credit protection under the Explanation to Rule 56-A(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 remained available. The controlling test was whether the material emerged in the course of manufacture, not whether it was later cut, rejected, or sold at nil duty. The reasoning was reinforced by the parallel principle in Rule 57D(1), under which credit is not denied merely because part of the inputs ends up in waste, refuse, or by-product arising during manufacture. On that basis, proforma credit was allowed and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Thu, 16 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:16:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80388 Defective cut tubes and cut tyres cleared as waste were treated as waste or by-product arising during the manufacturing process, so the input-credit protection under the Explanation to Rule 56-A(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 remained available. The controlling test was whether the material emerged in the course of manufacture, not whether it was later cut, rejected, or sold at nil duty. The reasoning was reinforced by the parallel principle in Rule 57D(1), under which credit is not denied merely because part of the inputs ends up in waste, refuse, or by-product arising during manufacture. On that basis, proforma credit was allowed and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80388