https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338552 Notification No. 6/2002-CE(NT) did not grant deemed credit to a manufacturer who had already availed credit under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, because paragraph 4 expressly excludes that benefit in such cases. On the admitted facts, the exclusion applied and the deemed credit demand was sustained. The Tribunal also accepted the request for the statutory reduced-penalty option under Section 11AC(C) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and directed that the appellant could discharge duty, interest, and 25% penalty within the stipulated period. The result was partial relief only on penalty, not on the credit demand. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2018 18:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338552 Notification No. 6/2002-CE(NT) did not grant deemed credit to a manufacturer who had already availed credit under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, because paragraph 4 expressly excludes that benefit in such cases. On the admitted facts, the exclusion applied and the deemed credit demand was sustained. The Tribunal also accepted the request for the statutory reduced-penalty option under Section 11AC(C) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and directed that the appellant could discharge duty, interest, and 25% penalty within the stipulated period. The result was partial relief only on penalty, not on the credit demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338552