https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333010 An exemption option under Notification No. 9/2003-CE, once exercised in writing before the first clearances, could not be withdrawn during the same financial year because the notification barred mid-year cancellation; the exemption therefore continued for that year. In an interpretational dispute over the notification's effect, penalty was not justified because the controversy was bona fide and turned on construction of the exemption regime. The assessee succeeded on withdrawal of the exemption option and on penalty, while the CENVAT credit recovery issue was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision. en-us Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333010 An exemption option under Notification No. 9/2003-CE, once exercised in writing before the first clearances, could not be withdrawn during the same financial year because the notification barred mid-year cancellation; the exemption therefore continued for that year. In an interpretational dispute over the notification's effect, penalty was not justified because the controversy was bona fide and turned on construction of the exemption regime. The assessee succeeded on withdrawal of the exemption option and on penalty, while the CENVAT credit recovery issue was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333010