https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246467 The appellant, a steel products manufacturer, was not liable to pay duty equivalent to 10% of exempted goods cleared to SEZ developers without maintaining separate accounts for inputs used. The Tribunal held that separate accounts were not required for goods supplied to SEZ developers under Rule 6(6)(i) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Consequently, the denial of CENVAT Credit and penalty imposed on the appellant were deemed unjustified, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected. This case clarified the application of CENVAT Credit Rules to goods cleared to SEZ developers, emphasizing the necessity of understanding specific provisions for manufacturers. en-us Wed, 09 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:23:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246467 The appellant, a steel products manufacturer, was not liable to pay duty equivalent to 10% of exempted goods cleared to SEZ developers without maintaining separate accounts for inputs used. The Tribunal held that separate accounts were not required for goods supplied to SEZ developers under Rule 6(6)(i) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Consequently, the denial of CENVAT Credit and penalty imposed on the appellant were deemed unjustified, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected. This case clarified the application of CENVAT Credit Rules to goods cleared to SEZ developers, emphasizing the necessity of understanding specific provisions for manufacturers. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246467