https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82362 Notification No. 108/78 was interpreted as limiting rebate to the duty actually paid or payable on clearance of the goods, and not as creating any entitlement to rebate at the prescribed rate regardless of duty incidence. The controlling principle applied was that rebate or exemption under such a notification cannot exceed the duty otherwise leviable. On that basis, the view allowing rebate beyond the duty actually paid was rejected, and the impugned order was set aside to the extent it permitted excess rebate. en-us Fri, 07 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jul 2011 15:55:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82362 Notification No. 108/78 was interpreted as limiting rebate to the duty actually paid or payable on clearance of the goods, and not as creating any entitlement to rebate at the prescribed rate regardless of duty incidence. The controlling principle applied was that rebate or exemption under such a notification cannot exceed the duty otherwise leviable. On that basis, the view allowing rebate beyond the duty actually paid was rejected, and the impugned order was set aside to the extent it permitted excess rebate. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82362