https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95969 Forklift trucks used captively as material handling equipment were analysed under the distinct treatment of capital goods and inputs in excise law. The Tribunal applied its Larger Bench view that the phrase "used for producing or processing of any goods" is wider than direct use in manufacture, so such equipment could qualify as capital goods for credit. However, once recognised as capital goods, the same equipment could not be treated as inputs for exemption under Notification No. 217/86-C.E. The notification benefit was therefore unavailable, and the denial of exemption was sustained. en-us Sun, 07 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:12:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95969 Forklift trucks used captively as material handling equipment were analysed under the distinct treatment of capital goods and inputs in excise law. The Tribunal applied its Larger Bench view that the phrase "used for producing or processing of any goods" is wider than direct use in manufacture, so such equipment could qualify as capital goods for credit. However, once recognised as capital goods, the same equipment could not be treated as inputs for exemption under Notification No. 217/86-C.E. The notification benefit was therefore unavailable, and the denial of exemption was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Sun, 07 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95969