https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153497 Clearances to an SEZ developer or promoter were treated as exports under the SEZ regime, so goods removed without payment of duty were not regarded as exempted goods. As a result, the condition precedent for invoking Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not satisfied, and the demand for reversal was prima facie unsustainable at the stay stage. The appellant was therefore held entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal. en-us Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:14:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153497 Clearances to an SEZ developer or promoter were treated as exports under the SEZ regime, so goods removed without payment of duty were not regarded as exempted goods. As a result, the condition precedent for invoking Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not satisfied, and the demand for reversal was prima facie unsustainable at the stay stage. The appellant was therefore held entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153497