https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246406 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that where an assessee had availed cenvat credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods and had reversed the credit relatable to exempted products, the demand to pay 8% or 10% of the value of exempted clearances was not sustainable. The dispute was treated as covered by the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 introduced by the Finance Act, 2010, and by the Tribunal's earlier decision relied on by the appellant. The impugned orders were set aside. en-us Mon, 05 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:14:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246406 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that where an assessee had availed cenvat credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods and had reversed the credit relatable to exempted products, the demand to pay 8% or 10% of the value of exempted clearances was not sustainable. The dispute was treated as covered by the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 introduced by the Finance Act, 2010, and by the Tribunal's earlier decision relied on by the appellant. The impugned orders were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246406