https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125323 Common input used for both dutiable and exempted final products did not justify the demand of an amount calculated at 8%/10% of the exempted goods' price, with penalty, merely for not maintaining separate accounts under Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal followed an earlier identical decision and noted that the authorities cited by the Revenue did not address the precise entitlement and consequence under the Cenvat Credit Rules where inputs were used as fuel. On that basis, it held that the impugned demand could not be sustained and the penalty also failed. en-us Mon, 15 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:05:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125323 Common input used for both dutiable and exempted final products did not justify the demand of an amount calculated at 8%/10% of the exempted goods' price, with penalty, merely for not maintaining separate accounts under Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal followed an earlier identical decision and noted that the authorities cited by the Revenue did not address the precise entitlement and consequence under the Cenvat Credit Rules where inputs were used as fuel. On that basis, it held that the impugned demand could not be sustained and the penalty also failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125323