https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220623 The dispute concerned reversal of CENVAT credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods, and the Tribunal remanded the matter because the only issue argued was whether the assessee had properly reversed the credit attributable to exempted goods. The High Court noted that the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 applied only to disputes relating to 10 September 2004 to 31 March 2008, and that the Revenue had not raised the specific objection based on non-compliance with the Rule 6(3A) option procedure before the Tribunal. The remand for verification was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220623 The dispute concerned reversal of CENVAT credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods, and the Tribunal remanded the matter because the only issue argued was whether the assessee had properly reversed the credit attributable to exempted goods. The High Court noted that the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 applied only to disputes relating to 10 September 2004 to 31 March 2008, and that the Revenue had not raised the specific objection based on non-compliance with the Rule 6(3A) option procedure before the Tribunal. The remand for verification was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220623