https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343074 Cenvat credit validly availed while final products were dutiable need not be reversed merely because the manufacturer later opts for exemption under Notification No. 50/2003, where the subsequent reversal requirement was introduced after the relevant period and operates prospectively. The exemption unit could not effectively use any amount recredited to its Cenvat account. Cash refund was therefore the appropriate relief for amounts reversed or paid through the PLA, rather than restoration of unusable credit. The assessee obtained relief from both the credit-reversal demand and recredit of the refund amount. en-us Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 May 2017 07:32:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343074 Cenvat credit validly availed while final products were dutiable need not be reversed merely because the manufacturer later opts for exemption under Notification No. 50/2003, where the subsequent reversal requirement was introduced after the relevant period and operates prospectively. The exemption unit could not effectively use any amount recredited to its Cenvat account. Cash refund was therefore the appropriate relief for amounts reversed or paid through the PLA, rather than restoration of unusable credit. The assessee obtained relief from both the credit-reversal demand and recredit of the refund amount. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343074