https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122167 Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was treated as materially different from the earlier Modvat provision, so the prior Tribunal ruling on furnace oil used by a job worker could not be applied automatically. The order noted that credit restrictions on inputs used in exempted goods, together with the exception in Rule 6(2), had to be examined in the changed statutory setting, and that the job-work exemption notification did not by itself resolve the issue. On that basis, the controversy was referred for consideration by a division bench and placed before the President for constitution of a larger bench. en-us Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:19:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122167 Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was treated as materially different from the earlier Modvat provision, so the prior Tribunal ruling on furnace oil used by a job worker could not be applied automatically. The order noted that credit restrictions on inputs used in exempted goods, together with the exception in Rule 6(2), had to be examined in the changed statutory setting, and that the job-work exemption notification did not by itself resolve the issue. On that basis, the controversy was referred for consideration by a division bench and placed before the President for constitution of a larger bench. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122167