https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42756 A writ petition was maintainable against an administrative excise directive where statutory appeal and revision against subordinate orders were not an equally efficacious remedy to challenge the directive itself. Under Section 50 of the Finance Act, 1982, exemption by way of set-off had to be applied first, so special duty of excise was computed only on the balance remaining after the exemption. The proforma credit scheme under Notification No. 201/79-C.E. and Rule 56-A did not require correlation between particular inputs and exempted final products; in the absence of clear language, no input-output nexus could be implied. The challenged directive and consequential directions were therefore treated as unsustainable. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:00:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42756 A writ petition was maintainable against an administrative excise directive where statutory appeal and revision against subordinate orders were not an equally efficacious remedy to challenge the directive itself. Under Section 50 of the Finance Act, 1982, exemption by way of set-off had to be applied first, so special duty of excise was computed only on the balance remaining after the exemption. The proforma credit scheme under Notification No. 201/79-C.E. and Rule 56-A did not require correlation between particular inputs and exempted final products; in the absence of clear language, no input-output nexus could be implied. The challenged directive and consequential directions were therefore treated as unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42756