<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (11) TMI 517 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122138</link>
    <description>Where common input credit on Hexane used for both dutiable and exempted products was fully reversed, the basis for invoking the alternative liability under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 did not survive. The demand to pay 8% of the value of exempted clearances was therefore not sustainable and was set aside. The record showed complete reversal of the credit attributable to the common input, which removed the statutory foundation for further payment on exempted products.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:23:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 517 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122138</link>
      <description>Where common input credit on Hexane used for both dutiable and exempted products was fully reversed, the basis for invoking the alternative liability under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 did not survive. The demand to pay 8% of the value of exempted clearances was therefore not sustainable and was set aside. The record showed complete reversal of the credit attributable to the common input, which removed the statutory foundation for further payment on exempted products.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>