https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54888 Under the common-inputs credit reversal scheme, failure to maintain separate accounts for dutiable and exempted goods did not justify an 8% demand on exempted-clearance sale value where credit attributable to those clearances had already been reversed. Reversal of the proportionate credit was treated as equivalent to non-availment of credit. Because the exempted clearances formed only a small part of production and the related credit had been reversed, a notional amount based on sale value was not sustainable. The 8% demand was therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 03 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:48:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54888 Under the common-inputs credit reversal scheme, failure to maintain separate accounts for dutiable and exempted goods did not justify an 8% demand on exempted-clearance sale value where credit attributable to those clearances had already been reversed. Reversal of the proportionate credit was treated as equivalent to non-availment of credit. Because the exempted clearances formed only a small part of production and the related credit had been reversed, a notional amount based on sale value was not sustainable. The 8% demand was therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54888