https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363452 Where cotton yarn was covered during the relevant period by parallel notifications prescribing nil duty and 4% duty, the note states that the assessee could adopt the beneficial notification and treat the product as dutiable, so CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services was not to be denied. On the export rebate issue, it states that rebate on exported cotton yarn could not be recovered on the assumption that the goods were fully exempt, since duty had been paid on the exports. The note concludes that the denial of credit and recovery of rebate were both set aside. en-us Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jul 2018 06:06:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363452 Where cotton yarn was covered during the relevant period by parallel notifications prescribing nil duty and 4% duty, the note states that the assessee could adopt the beneficial notification and treat the product as dutiable, so CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services was not to be denied. On the export rebate issue, it states that rebate on exported cotton yarn could not be recovered on the assumption that the goods were fully exempt, since duty had been paid on the exports. The note concludes that the denial of credit and recovery of rebate were both set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363452