https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371465 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the duty demand, interest, and penalties imposed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal held that the appellant was not required to pay 10% of the sale value of goods supplied to SEZ units under Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as they did not maintain separate accounts for dutiable and exempted products. Additionally, the Tribunal treated the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 as applicable from an earlier date, in line with previous case law and High Court decisions, ultimately providing relief to the appellant. en-us Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:34:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371465 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the duty demand, interest, and penalties imposed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal held that the appellant was not required to pay 10% of the sale value of goods supplied to SEZ units under Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as they did not maintain separate accounts for dutiable and exempted products. Additionally, the Tribunal treated the retrospective amendment to Rule 6 as applicable from an earlier date, in line with previous case law and High Court decisions, ultimately providing relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371465