https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201623 CESTAT, MUMBAI - AT allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant entitled to deny refund of accumulated Cenvat credit. Supplies to SEZ units under Letter of Undertaking were not treated as "export" for purposes of rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; the definition of export must be taken from the Customs Act. The respondent failed to prove inability to utilize the Cenvat credit, so refund relief under rule 5 was denied. en-us Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2025 15:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201623 CESTAT, MUMBAI - AT allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant entitled to deny refund of accumulated Cenvat credit. Supplies to SEZ units under Letter of Undertaking were not treated as "export" for purposes of rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; the definition of export must be taken from the Customs Act. The respondent failed to prove inability to utilize the Cenvat credit, so refund relief under rule 5 was denied. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201623