https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290788 Re-computation of a differential refund under an area-based exemption was examined by comparing duty liability on Chapter 26 goods, payments made through PLA and CENVAT credit, and duty payable on the prescribed value addition. The Commissioner (Appeals) had supported re-determination with detailed calculations showing that the refund already sanctioned was lower than the duty payable on value addition, and that the earlier computation required correction. As that reasoning was not rebutted, the claim for any further refund was rejected and no interference with the re-determination was warranted. en-us Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:51:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290788 Re-computation of a differential refund under an area-based exemption was examined by comparing duty liability on Chapter 26 goods, payments made through PLA and CENVAT credit, and duty payable on the prescribed value addition. The Commissioner (Appeals) had supported re-determination with detailed calculations showing that the refund already sanctioned was lower than the duty payable on value addition, and that the earlier computation required correction. As that reasoning was not rebutted, the claim for any further refund was rejected and no interference with the re-determination was warranted. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290788