https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201809 Capital goods cleared after substantial use were not removed "as such" under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, so reversal of Cenvat credit was not required. The machine had been used for several years and sold as used goods at transaction value, distinguishing precedents involving unused capital goods. The demand was also time-barred because the clearance was disclosed in ER-1 returns and noticed during audit, showing no suppression of facts to justify the extended limitation period. Demand, interest, and penalty were therefore unsustainable. en-us Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201809 Capital goods cleared after substantial use were not removed "as such" under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, so reversal of Cenvat credit was not required. The machine had been used for several years and sold as used goods at transaction value, distinguishing precedents involving unused capital goods. The demand was also time-barred because the clearance was disclosed in ER-1 returns and noticed during audit, showing no suppression of facts to justify the extended limitation period. Demand, interest, and penalty were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201809