https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49191 After the amendment to Rule 57F(1)(ii), Modvat credit could be used in relation to inputs exported as such under bond because the earlier restrictive wording was removed, and the Board's circular treated such exports on par with final products for credit utilisation. On that legal position, refund claims based on exported inputs were supportable. The text also notes that remand for fresh verification of export proof and disclaimer of drawback was unnecessary where the record already contained export documentation and the challenge centred on the Modvat issue. The appellate relief was therefore left undisturbed. en-us Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:37:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49191 After the amendment to Rule 57F(1)(ii), Modvat credit could be used in relation to inputs exported as such under bond because the earlier restrictive wording was removed, and the Board's circular treated such exports on par with final products for credit utilisation. On that legal position, refund claims based on exported inputs were supportable. The text also notes that remand for fresh verification of export proof and disclaimer of drawback was unnecessary where the record already contained export documentation and the challenge centred on the Modvat issue. The appellate relief was therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49191