https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48834 The Tribunal framework was interpreted as allowing the President to constitute a Larger Bench and refer a matter even where an earlier Larger Bench view existed, because a Bench may doubt the correctness of an earlier decision and seek reconsideration. Under Rule 57F(1)(ii), duty on inputs removed as such was held payable at the rate originally taken as credit, not the rate prevailing on the date of removal, because the provision is aimed at restoring the duty incidence already availed through credit. The earlier Larger Bench view in American Auto Services was followed as correctly stating the position. en-us Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:08:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48834 The Tribunal framework was interpreted as allowing the President to constitute a Larger Bench and refer a matter even where an earlier Larger Bench view existed, because a Bench may doubt the correctness of an earlier decision and seek reconsideration. Under Rule 57F(1)(ii), duty on inputs removed as such was held payable at the rate originally taken as credit, not the rate prevailing on the date of removal, because the provision is aimed at restoring the duty incidence already availed through credit. The earlier Larger Bench view in American Auto Services was followed as correctly stating the position. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48834