https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190034 The Tribunal applied Section 4(1) of the Central Excise Act read with its explanation, inserted in 2003, to hold that the respondent-assessee was entitled to cum-duty benefit. The challenge based on earlier decisions failed because those rulings did not consider the statutory explanation, and the entitlement was treated as arising from the statutory scheme rather than as a substantial question of law. en-us Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 10:14:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190034 The Tribunal applied Section 4(1) of the Central Excise Act read with its explanation, inserted in 2003, to hold that the respondent-assessee was entitled to cum-duty benefit. The challenge based on earlier decisions failed because those rulings did not consider the statutory explanation, and the entitlement was treated as arising from the statutory scheme rather than as a substantial question of law. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190034