https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239815 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing cenvat credit on capital goods sent directly to job work despite not being received in the factory. The appellant's argument under Rule 4(5)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was accepted, emphasizing that the capital goods were used by the job worker for the appellant. The Tribunal also rejected the Department's appeal on the limitation period issue, emphasizing the importance of adherence to central excise laws and procedures. Ultimately, the decision favored the appellant, affirming their right to claim cenvat credit on the capital goods sent for job work. en-us Fri, 11 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239815 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing cenvat credit on capital goods sent directly to job work despite not being received in the factory. The appellant's argument under Rule 4(5)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was accepted, emphasizing that the capital goods were used by the job worker for the appellant. The Tribunal also rejected the Department's appeal on the limitation period issue, emphasizing the importance of adherence to central excise laws and procedures. Ultimately, the decision favored the appellant, affirming their right to claim cenvat credit on the capital goods sent for job work. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239815