https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81782 Duty-paid inputs removed as such from the factory under Rule 57F(1) were not liable to duty at a higher rate merely because the removal occurred later. The provision deems such inputs to be manufactured in the same factory, but the proviso only requires that duty on removal not be less than the credit allowed under Rule 57A. Where the inputs were already duty-paid and credit had been taken, Rule 9A(ii) did not justify enhancement of duty beyond the duty originally borne. The applicable duty was therefore confined to the duty already paid on the inputs, subject to the Modvat credit floor. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:50:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81782 Duty-paid inputs removed as such from the factory under Rule 57F(1) were not liable to duty at a higher rate merely because the removal occurred later. The provision deems such inputs to be manufactured in the same factory, but the proviso only requires that duty on removal not be less than the credit allowed under Rule 57A. Where the inputs were already duty-paid and credit had been taken, Rule 9A(ii) did not justify enhancement of duty beyond the duty originally borne. The applicable duty was therefore confined to the duty already paid on the inputs, subject to the Modvat credit floor. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81782