https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81725 Inputs cleared under a valid exemption notification were held not to be treated as goods charged to nil rate of duty for MODVAT purposes, because the scheme confined credit to inputs that had actually suffered duty. The Tribunal read Rule 57G(2) as requiring duty-paid inputs and rejected the argument that exempted clearances could be equated with nil-rated goods merely because no duty was paid on removal. On the merits, MODVAT credit was therefore not available on the exempted inputs, though the matter was referred to a Larger Bench because of a conflicting earlier view. en-us Tue, 16 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:10:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81725 Inputs cleared under a valid exemption notification were held not to be treated as goods charged to nil rate of duty for MODVAT purposes, because the scheme confined credit to inputs that had actually suffered duty. The Tribunal read Rule 57G(2) as requiring duty-paid inputs and rejected the argument that exempted clearances could be equated with nil-rated goods merely because no duty was paid on removal. On the merits, MODVAT credit was therefore not available on the exempted inputs, though the matter was referred to a Larger Bench because of a conflicting earlier view. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 16 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81725