https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32782 The respondent availed cenvat credit on inputs for manufacturing an exempted product, H.Acid, leading to a show cause notice for recovery. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the respondent's argument that goods manufactured on job work basis are not exempted goods, supported by a precedent decision. The demand for cenvat credit failed due to the absence of separate accounts for exempted and dutiable goods, as required by Rule 6. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected, emphasizing the correct application of Rule 6 and the liability of the principal manufacturer to pay duty on goods manufactured on job work basis. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32782 The respondent availed cenvat credit on inputs for manufacturing an exempted product, H.Acid, leading to a show cause notice for recovery. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the respondent's argument that goods manufactured on job work basis are not exempted goods, supported by a precedent decision. The demand for cenvat credit failed due to the absence of separate accounts for exempted and dutiable goods, as required by Rule 6. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected, emphasizing the correct application of Rule 6 and the liability of the principal manufacturer to pay duty on goods manufactured on job work basis. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32782