https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209835 Used capital goods cleared after substantial use were not treated as removal "as such" under Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, so the assessee was not required to reverse the full Cenvat credit and could discharge duty on depreciated value. The later proviso introduced by Notification No. 39/2007-CE(NT) was treated as not governing the period in dispute, and the departmental circulars supporting depreciation on used capital goods were accepted. The demand was also barred by limitation because the clearances and duty payment were reflected in returns and were within the department's knowledge. The Revenue's challenge therefore failed on both merits and limitation. en-us Mon, 11 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209835 Used capital goods cleared after substantial use were not treated as removal "as such" under Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, so the assessee was not required to reverse the full Cenvat credit and could discharge duty on depreciated value. The later proviso introduced by Notification No. 39/2007-CE(NT) was treated as not governing the period in dispute, and the departmental circulars supporting depreciation on used capital goods were accepted. The demand was also barred by limitation because the clearances and duty payment were reflected in returns and were within the department's knowledge. The Revenue's challenge therefore failed on both merits and limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 11 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209835