https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168647 Reversal of CENVAT credit was treated as a recognised mode of duty payment, so rebate under Rule 18 could not be denied merely because the duty was discharged through credit reversal rather than cash. Capital goods exported after use were also held to remain within the expression "removed as such" under Rule 3(5), because use and normal wear did not change their essential character. On that basis, the article states that rebate eligibility survived both objections and the assessee's claim was upheld. en-us Thu, 24 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168647 Reversal of CENVAT credit was treated as a recognised mode of duty payment, so rebate under Rule 18 could not be denied merely because the duty was discharged through credit reversal rather than cash. Capital goods exported after use were also held to remain within the expression "removed as such" under Rule 3(5), because use and normal wear did not change their essential character. On that basis, the article states that rebate eligibility survived both objections and the assessee's claim was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168647