https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265601 Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules could not be sustained without first examining whether the assessee was actually clearing Ayurvedic medicines under a concessional notification and whether common inputs or input services were used. The appellate authority had not properly considered the plea that the medicines were not exempted goods and that no Cenvat credit had been availed. Because the factual foundation for applying the separate accounts requirement remained unresolved, the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for denovo adjudication. en-us Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265601 Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules could not be sustained without first examining whether the assessee was actually clearing Ayurvedic medicines under a concessional notification and whether common inputs or input services were used. The appellate authority had not properly considered the plea that the medicines were not exempted goods and that no Cenvat credit had been availed. Because the factual foundation for applying the separate accounts requirement remained unresolved, the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for denovo adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265601