https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174153 The appeals centered on whether clearances to SEZ developers should be treated as clearances of exempted goods under Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Department demanded 10% of the sale value for goods supplied to SEZ developers as exempted goods. Despite contestation, demands were confirmed against the assessees. In specific cases, demands were set aside or penalties were not imposed. The decision in Sujana Metal Products Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad was referenced, favoring treating supplies to SEZ units as exports and impacting the application of CENVAT Credit Rules. Ultimately, the orders were set aside, and no penalties were imposed. en-us Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174153 The appeals centered on whether clearances to SEZ developers should be treated as clearances of exempted goods under Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Department demanded 10% of the sale value for goods supplied to SEZ developers as exempted goods. Despite contestation, demands were confirmed against the assessees. In specific cases, demands were set aside or penalties were not imposed. The decision in Sujana Metal Products Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad was referenced, favoring treating supplies to SEZ units as exports and impacting the application of CENVAT Credit Rules. Ultimately, the orders were set aside, and no penalties were imposed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174153