https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126031 Duty paid on inputs remained admissible as credit, and taking that credit in the PLA instead of the Cenvat credit account was treated as a procedural accounting mistake rather than a substantive breach. Where the inputs were originally procured without duty under Rule 19 and duty plus interest were later paid by TR-6 challans on diversion for domestic clearances, the demand and penalty could not be sustained because there was no dispute over the availability of credit. The resulting duty demand and penalty were set aside. en-us Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:38:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126031 Duty paid on inputs remained admissible as credit, and taking that credit in the PLA instead of the Cenvat credit account was treated as a procedural accounting mistake rather than a substantive breach. Where the inputs were originally procured without duty under Rule 19 and duty plus interest were later paid by TR-6 challans on diversion for domestic clearances, the demand and penalty could not be sustained because there was no dispute over the availability of credit. The resulting duty demand and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126031