https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158501 The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to provide evidence that the plastic flooring claimed for Cenvat credit was used in the manufacture of capital goods. The authorities found that the plastic flooring was not integral to the manufacturing process and was used after the final product was ready for dispatch. The claim was denied due to lack of proof that the plastic flooring qualified as an input for Cenvat credit, leading to the dismissal of the appeal despite a reduced penalty. en-us Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:38:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158501 The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to provide evidence that the plastic flooring claimed for Cenvat credit was used in the manufacture of capital goods. The authorities found that the plastic flooring was not integral to the manufacturing process and was used after the final product was ready for dispatch. The claim was denied due to lack of proof that the plastic flooring qualified as an input for Cenvat credit, leading to the dismissal of the appeal despite a reduced penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158501