https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42043 A duty-reducing excise notification did not, by itself, bar proforma credit under Rule 56A because the concession operated in a different sphere and did not fully exempt the goods from duty. The text emphasises that simultaneous fiscal benefits may coexist unless the notification or rule expressly excludes credit, and that express exclusions were used in other notifications when intended. It also notes that a writ petition need not be rejected solely for an alternative statutory remedy where the matter has been pending for years and interim relief has already been granted. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2010 17:26:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42043 A duty-reducing excise notification did not, by itself, bar proforma credit under Rule 56A because the concession operated in a different sphere and did not fully exempt the goods from duty. The text emphasises that simultaneous fiscal benefits may coexist unless the notification or rule expressly excludes credit, and that express exclusions were used in other notifications when intended. It also notes that a writ petition need not be rejected solely for an alternative statutory remedy where the matter has been pending for years and interim relief has already been granted. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42043