https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52367 Cenvat credit taken on pouches received from another unit could not support a duty demand where the credit was reversed at the time of clearance and duty was paid on the final pack of 55 pouches. Even if the packing activity did not amount to manufacture under Note 2 to Chapter 24, the alleged irregular credit caused no revenue prejudice because the duty burden on the cleared goods was fully discharged and the situation was revenue neutral. On that basis, the denial of credit and consequent demand were held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Oct 2010 13:54:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52367 Cenvat credit taken on pouches received from another unit could not support a duty demand where the credit was reversed at the time of clearance and duty was paid on the final pack of 55 pouches. Even if the packing activity did not amount to manufacture under Note 2 to Chapter 24, the alleged irregular credit caused no revenue prejudice because the duty burden on the cleared goods was fully discharged and the situation was revenue neutral. On that basis, the denial of credit and consequent demand were held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52367