https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115988 Periodic sample test reports for nylon filament yarn showing denierage above the exemption limit were treated as governing the intervening period until the next sample, because the assessee did not prove any change in manufacturing process or product characteristics after sampling. The duty demand was therefore sustained on that basis. For valuation, abatement from the sale price was recognised under excise law, and Modvat credit on chips was allowed to the extent duty had been paid under protest and remained open to adjustment. A further claim for additional exclusion based on FIFO and alleged deemed exports was rejected for lack of correlation. en-us Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jun 2012 13:16:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115988 Periodic sample test reports for nylon filament yarn showing denierage above the exemption limit were treated as governing the intervening period until the next sample, because the assessee did not prove any change in manufacturing process or product characteristics after sampling. The duty demand was therefore sustained on that basis. For valuation, abatement from the sale price was recognised under excise law, and Modvat credit on chips was allowed to the extent duty had been paid under protest and remained open to adjustment. A further claim for additional exclusion based on FIFO and alleged deemed exports was rejected for lack of correlation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115988