https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270971 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, ruling that the Additional Excise Duty (AED) paid on inputs had to be considered a cost to the appellant, as they were unable to utilize the credit for discharging duty on the finished product not liable to AED. Despite availing the AED credit, it could not be applied in this scenario, emphasizing the need to assess the applicability of credits in determining the cost of production for excisable goods. en-us Mon, 28 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270971 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, ruling that the Additional Excise Duty (AED) paid on inputs had to be considered a cost to the appellant, as they were unable to utilize the credit for discharging duty on the finished product not liable to AED. Despite availing the AED credit, it could not be applied in this scenario, emphasizing the need to assess the applicability of credits in determining the cost of production for excisable goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270971