https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84736 Opting for Notification No. 175/86 did not require reversal of MODVAT credit on inputs lying in stock, inputs in semi-finished goods, or inputs in finished goods. The notification was read as not barring MODVAT credit; instead, its exemption operated in a restricted manner under the relevant paragraph, with the proper consequence being limitation of the exemption or duty recovery at the stage of clearance for manufacture outside the MODVAT scheme. A demand for repayment of credit under Rule 57C read with Rule 57-I was therefore unsustainable, and the credit already availed on such inputs did not have to be reversed. en-us Mon, 14 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:56:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84736 Opting for Notification No. 175/86 did not require reversal of MODVAT credit on inputs lying in stock, inputs in semi-finished goods, or inputs in finished goods. The notification was read as not barring MODVAT credit; instead, its exemption operated in a restricted manner under the relevant paragraph, with the proper consequence being limitation of the exemption or duty recovery at the stage of clearance for manufacture outside the MODVAT scheme. A demand for repayment of credit under Rule 57C read with Rule 57-I was therefore unsustainable, and the credit already availed on such inputs did not have to be reversed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 14 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84736