https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363452 CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services remained admissible where cotton yarn was subject to parallel notifications prescribing nil duty and duty at 4%. As cotton yarn was not treated as exempt during the relevant period, a manufacturer could elect the beneficial notification and validly pay duty at 4%; denial of credit lacked basis. Rebate on exported cotton yarn was also correctly sanctioned because duty had been paid on the exported goods. Recovery of rebate on the premise that the goods attracted nil duty was unjustified. The credit denial and rebate recovery were 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 CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services remained admissible where cotton yarn was subject to parallel notifications prescribing nil duty and duty at 4%. As cotton yarn was not treated as exempt during the relevant period, a manufacturer could elect the beneficial notification and validly pay duty at 4%; denial of credit lacked basis. Rebate on exported cotton yarn was also correctly sanctioned because duty had been paid on the exported goods. Recovery of rebate on the premise that the goods attracted nil duty was unjustified. The credit denial and rebate recovery were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363452