https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185149 Where a manufacturer took CENVAT credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods, the absence of separate accounts under Rule 57AD(2) did not justify a demand once the entire credit had later been reversed or repaid with interest. The operative principle was that, after full neutralisation of the credit, no unwarranted benefit continued to exist and the mischief targeted by the rule no longer survived. On that basis, the demand under Rule 57AD(2) was held unsustainable and the Revenue's appeals were rejected. en-us Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Aug 2016 12:02:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185149 Where a manufacturer took CENVAT credit on common inputs used for both dutiable and exempted goods, the absence of separate accounts under Rule 57AD(2) did not justify a demand once the entire credit had later been reversed or repaid with interest. The operative principle was that, after full neutralisation of the credit, no unwarranted benefit continued to exist and the mischief targeted by the rule no longer survived. On that basis, the demand under Rule 57AD(2) was held unsustainable and the Revenue's appeals were rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185149