https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375666 The appeal was allowed by the Judicial Member, setting aside the Commissioner's order demanding 6% of the value of exempted goods. The appellant had already reversed the proportionate credit as required by the rules and was found not liable to pay the demanded amount. The Judicial Member held that the appellant's compliance with the provisions and reliance on previous decisions rendered the demand erroneous, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant on 15/02/2019. en-us Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Feb 2019 08:54:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375666 The appeal was allowed by the Judicial Member, setting aside the Commissioner's order demanding 6% of the value of exempted goods. The appellant had already reversed the proportionate credit as required by the rules and was found not liable to pay the demanded amount. The Judicial Member held that the appellant's compliance with the provisions and reliance on previous decisions rendered the demand erroneous, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant on 15/02/2019. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375666