https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234998 The Government held that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing rebate claims under Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.) due to the clear prohibition in condition 2(h) against manufacturers benefiting from Notification No. 39/2001-C.E. The rebate claims were deemed inadmissible, and the revision application was granted, denying the rebate to the assessee. Consequently, the orders approving the rebate claims were overturned, and the rebate claims were rejected in line with the provisions of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.). en-us Wed, 03 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234998 The Government held that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing rebate claims under Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.) due to the clear prohibition in condition 2(h) against manufacturers benefiting from Notification No. 39/2001-C.E. The rebate claims were deemed inadmissible, and the revision application was granted, denying the rebate to the assessee. Consequently, the orders approving the rebate claims were overturned, and the rebate claims were rejected in line with the provisions of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.). Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234998