https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333093 The court dismissed the appeal challenging the classification of supplies from a DTA unit to SEZ developer/promoter as 'exports' under Rule 6(6) of the CENVAT Credit Rule 2004. The court emphasized the importance of consistent legal interpretations, referencing similar cases decided by different High Courts in favor of assessees. It was held that no substantial question of law arose in the case, underscoring the significance of maintaining coherence in interpreting central statutes like the Central Excise Act. en-us Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333093 The court dismissed the appeal challenging the classification of supplies from a DTA unit to SEZ developer/promoter as 'exports' under Rule 6(6) of the CENVAT Credit Rule 2004. The court emphasized the importance of consistent legal interpretations, referencing similar cases decided by different High Courts in favor of assessees. It was held that no substantial question of law arose in the case, underscoring the significance of maintaining coherence in interpreting central statutes like the Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333093