https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352821 Rule 3(4A)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was read as an exclusive scheme for dealers who opt to clear goods on payment of an amount equal to excise duty, with the proviso barring withdrawal of that option during the remaining financial year. A dealer dealing exclusively in Chapter 50 to 63 goods could not mix clearances by paying duty for some consignments and reversing credit for others, because that would defeat the proviso and render part of the rule ineffective. Reversal of credit was not treated as equivalent to opting out of credit for this purpose, and the restrictive interpretation was upheld. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Dec 2017 08:08:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352821 Rule 3(4A)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was read as an exclusive scheme for dealers who opt to clear goods on payment of an amount equal to excise duty, with the proviso barring withdrawal of that option during the remaining financial year. A dealer dealing exclusively in Chapter 50 to 63 goods could not mix clearances by paying duty for some consignments and reversing credit for others, because that would defeat the proviso and render part of the rule ineffective. Reversal of credit was not treated as equivalent to opting out of credit for this purpose, and the restrictive interpretation was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352821