https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217050 The judge allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and ruling in favor of the appellant. The court held that the appellant was not required to reverse the 10% value of the waste under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as the processing of waste into an exempted product did not mandate separate accounts. Drawing on precedents and specific cases, the judge concluded that the authorities' demand for payment was not justified, ultimately favoring the appellant in the case. en-us Fri, 14 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Sep 2012 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217050 The judge allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and ruling in favor of the appellant. The court held that the appellant was not required to reverse the 10% value of the waste under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as the processing of waste into an exempted product did not mandate separate accounts. Drawing on precedents and specific cases, the judge concluded that the authorities' demand for payment was not justified, ultimately favoring the appellant in the case. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217050