https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234997 The case involved issues regarding the maintenance of separate accounts for availing Cenvat credit under different notifications, correct availing of Cenvat credit and rebate claims, and the justification of rejection of rebate claims. The Government found that the requirement of maintaining separate accounts was waived by a specific circular, allowing proportionate input credit without separate accounts. As a result, the rejection of the rebate claim based on non-maintenance of separate accounts was deemed unjustified. The case was remanded back to the original authority for fresh consideration with a reasonable opportunity for both parties. en-us Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234997 The case involved issues regarding the maintenance of separate accounts for availing Cenvat credit under different notifications, correct availing of Cenvat credit and rebate claims, and the justification of rejection of rebate claims. The Government found that the requirement of maintaining separate accounts was waived by a specific circular, allowing proportionate input credit without separate accounts. As a result, the rejection of the rebate claim based on non-maintenance of separate accounts was deemed unjustified. The case was remanded back to the original authority for fresh consideration with a reasonable opportunity for both parties. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234997