https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237104 Cenvat credit on structural steel items used during commissioning was admissible only if the assessee proved with specific evidence that the items were actually used in the manufacture of capital goods put to use in the factory. In the absence of detailed proof linking the steel to particular machinery or components, and with only invoices and a vague chart on record, the burden of proof was not discharged. The absence of any declaration in the ER-1 returns further supported the conclusion that the claim was unsubstantiated. Credit was therefore held inadmissible and the disallowance sustained. en-us Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237104 Cenvat credit on structural steel items used during commissioning was admissible only if the assessee proved with specific evidence that the items were actually used in the manufacture of capital goods put to use in the factory. In the absence of detailed proof linking the steel to particular machinery or components, and with only invoices and a vague chart on record, the burden of proof was not discharged. The absence of any declaration in the ER-1 returns further supported the conclusion that the claim was unsubstantiated. Credit was therefore held inadmissible and the disallowance sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237104