https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90223 Notification No. 208/83 was interpreted to allow exemption for finished goods made from ship-breaking scrap even where the inputs had suffered nil duty, because the phrase "duty already paid" was read in light of duty legally leviable on the inputs rather than actual payment in every case. The second proviso was treated as a restriction against taking Modvat or proforma credit, not as a separate requirement that duty must have been physically paid on the inputs. On that reading, exempted or nil-duty inputs were not disqualified where no credit had been availed, and the duty demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Fri, 27 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:50:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90223 Notification No. 208/83 was interpreted to allow exemption for finished goods made from ship-breaking scrap even where the inputs had suffered nil duty, because the phrase "duty already paid" was read in light of duty legally leviable on the inputs rather than actual payment in every case. The second proviso was treated as a restriction against taking Modvat or proforma credit, not as a separate requirement that duty must have been physically paid on the inputs. On that reading, exempted or nil-duty inputs were not disqualified where no credit had been availed, and the duty demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90223