https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239848 The Tribunal set aside the demand of 5% value of exempted goods under Rule 6 (3) (ii) of CCR 2004, ruling in favor of the appellant due to their inability to identify inputs for exempted goods and the impracticality of maintaining separate accounts. The Tribunal found the demand unsustainable under Rule 6 and allowed the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the manufacturer's obligation to segregate dutiable and exempted goods but considering practical difficulties in doing so. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239848 The Tribunal set aside the demand of 5% value of exempted goods under Rule 6 (3) (ii) of CCR 2004, ruling in favor of the appellant due to their inability to identify inputs for exempted goods and the impracticality of maintaining separate accounts. The Tribunal found the demand unsustainable under Rule 6 and allowed the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the manufacturer's obligation to segregate dutiable and exempted goods but considering practical difficulties in doing so. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239848