https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124636 Removal of inputs as such by a manufacturer to a 100% export-oriented unit under CT-3 certificate raised the question whether MODVAT credit had to be reversed or duty paid under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. The order considered the interaction of Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 with the notification and noted that the Board's circular on export under bond could not be automatically applied to such removals. Because co-ordinate bench rulings conflicted on the same issue, the matter was treated as requiring examination by a Larger Bench rather than final decision on the merits. en-us Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Oct 2012 16:30:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124636 Removal of inputs as such by a manufacturer to a 100% export-oriented unit under CT-3 certificate raised the question whether MODVAT credit had to be reversed or duty paid under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. The order considered the interaction of Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 with the notification and noted that the Board's circular on export under bond could not be automatically applied to such removals. Because co-ordinate bench rulings conflicted on the same issue, the matter was treated as requiring examination by a Larger Bench rather than final decision on the merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124636