https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210246 Refund of accumulated credit under the notification was upheld because the original authority had specifically quantified the input credit attributable to the exported goods for the relevant quarters, and that factual finding was not rebutted in appeal. The department produced no evidence that excess credit was refunded or that the credit actually taken differed materially from any amount suggested under the advance licence scheme or SION norms. The Board circular cited under Rule 191-B was held irrelevant on the facts. The refund was therefore correctly sustained and the departmental challenge failed. en-us Wed, 15 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jan 2014 11:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210246 Refund of accumulated credit under the notification was upheld because the original authority had specifically quantified the input credit attributable to the exported goods for the relevant quarters, and that factual finding was not rebutted in appeal. The department produced no evidence that excess credit was refunded or that the credit actually taken differed materially from any amount suggested under the advance licence scheme or SION norms. The Board circular cited under Rule 191-B was held irrelevant on the facts. The refund was therefore correctly sustained and the departmental challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210246