https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234039 The demand of 8% of the sale price of exempted goods under Rule 57AD of the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained once the lower authority found, after remand, that the wheel rims for ADV and harvester were manufactured from non-cenvatable inputs. On that factual basis, the condition for invoking the 8% demand no longer existed, and the demand was set aside. Any refund was stated to remain subject to the principle of unjust enrichment. en-us Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 May 2013 07:51:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234039 The demand of 8% of the sale price of exempted goods under Rule 57AD of the Central Excise Rules could not be sustained once the lower authority found, after remand, that the wheel rims for ADV and harvester were manufactured from non-cenvatable inputs. On that factual basis, the condition for invoking the 8% demand no longer existed, and the demand was set aside. Any refund was stated to remain subject to the principle of unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234039