https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783014 The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was entitled to exemption under N/N. 67/95-CE on relays captively consumed in manufacture of control panels, despite part of the panels being cleared under N/N. 12/2012-CE and for export. On a harmonious reading of N/N. 67/95-CE and proviso (vi), and in light of Rule 6 and Rule 6(6)(vii) of CCR, the Tribunal found that the appellant had duly discharged its obligations under Rule 6. Applying the doctrine of consistency with earlier orders in the appellant's favour, the Tribunal set aside the duty demand, and consequently annulled interest under s.11AA and penalty under Rule 25. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2025 08:41:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783014 The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was entitled to exemption under N/N. 67/95-CE on relays captively consumed in manufacture of control panels, despite part of the panels being cleared under N/N. 12/2012-CE and for export. On a harmonious reading of N/N. 67/95-CE and proviso (vi), and in light of Rule 6 and Rule 6(6)(vii) of CCR, the Tribunal found that the appellant had duly discharged its obligations under Rule 6. Applying the doctrine of consistency with earlier orders in the appellant's favour, the Tribunal set aside the duty demand, and consequently annulled interest under s.11AA and penalty under Rule 25. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783014