https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51386 A legal fiction treating a merchant-exporter as a deemed manufacturer under Notification No. 27/92-C.E. (N.T.) was confined to the procedural requirements of Rule 174 and could not be extended to Rule 57F(4). Refund of unutilised Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4) was available only to the manufacturer who had actually availed the credit, and it was distinct from rebate of duty on exported goods. On that basis, a merchant-exporter was not entitled to refund of unutilised Modvat credit, and the Revenue's challenge succeeded. en-us Fri, 09 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 14:19:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51386 A legal fiction treating a merchant-exporter as a deemed manufacturer under Notification No. 27/92-C.E. (N.T.) was confined to the procedural requirements of Rule 174 and could not be extended to Rule 57F(4). Refund of unutilised Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4) was available only to the manufacturer who had actually availed the credit, and it was distinct from rebate of duty on exported goods. On that basis, a merchant-exporter was not entitled to refund of unutilised Modvat credit, and the Revenue's challenge succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51386