https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54889 Notification No. 67/95-C.E. was held to apply only when the final products are not exempt from excise duty and are not subject to nil rate. Where the final product was exempt under Notification No. 6/2000 as amended, the amount paid under Rule 57CC was treated as a consequence of common-input credit reversal, not as duty on the final product. An exempt clearance did not become a duty-paid clearance merely because 8% of sale value was paid under Rule 57CC. On that reasoning, captive consumption exemption for the intermediate product was unavailable, and the duty demand was upheld. en-us Tue, 02 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:49:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54889 Notification No. 67/95-C.E. was held to apply only when the final products are not exempt from excise duty and are not subject to nil rate. Where the final product was exempt under Notification No. 6/2000 as amended, the amount paid under Rule 57CC was treated as a consequence of common-input credit reversal, not as duty on the final product. An exempt clearance did not become a duty-paid clearance merely because 8% of sale value was paid under Rule 57CC. On that reasoning, captive consumption exemption for the intermediate product was unavailable, and the duty demand was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54889