https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123420 Notification No. 56/02 was read as requiring a manufacturer to first utilise the entire available Cenvat credit standing at the end of the month for payment of duty on clearances during that month, and to pay only any balance in cash. On the facts noted, a balance remained in the Cenvat account at month-end, yet duty had been paid through PLA and refund was claimed. The Tribunal treated this as raising a prima facie issue under the notification condition and granted stay of the impugned refund order, allowing the stay petition. en-us Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Sep 2012 17:54:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123420 Notification No. 56/02 was read as requiring a manufacturer to first utilise the entire available Cenvat credit standing at the end of the month for payment of duty on clearances during that month, and to pay only any balance in cash. On the facts noted, a balance remained in the Cenvat account at month-end, yet duty had been paid through PLA and refund was claimed. The Tribunal treated this as raising a prima facie issue under the notification condition and granted stay of the impugned refund order, allowing the stay petition. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123420