https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221138 The appeals were allowed for remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the Tribunal's finding that the method of considering structural items as 'cenvatable' capital goods based solely on photographs lacked evidentiary value. The case was remanded for a fresh decision after directing a physical inspection of the respondent's factory by central excise officers to verify the fabrication of claimed capital goods. The Divisional Assistant Commissioner and Range Officer were tasked with conducting the inspection, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard, and furnishing a copy of the inspection report before the hearing, ensuring a fair reevaluation process. en-us Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:09:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221138 The appeals were allowed for remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the Tribunal's finding that the method of considering structural items as 'cenvatable' capital goods based solely on photographs lacked evidentiary value. The case was remanded for a fresh decision after directing a physical inspection of the respondent's factory by central excise officers to verify the fabrication of claimed capital goods. The Divisional Assistant Commissioner and Range Officer were tasked with conducting the inspection, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard, and furnishing a copy of the inspection report before the hearing, ensuring a fair reevaluation process. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221138