https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248747 On removal of old and used capital goods, the liability to reverse CENVAT credit had to be tested against the binding Larger Bench ruling on proportionate reversal, which applied the 2.5% per quarter formula from the date of availment of credit. An order proceeding on the basis that the entire credit was recoverable under Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 could not stand without reconsideration in light of that precedent. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication by the original authority after applying the correct legal basis and granting the assessee a hearing. en-us Mon, 07 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:06:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248747 On removal of old and used capital goods, the liability to reverse CENVAT credit had to be tested against the binding Larger Bench ruling on proportionate reversal, which applied the 2.5% per quarter formula from the date of availment of credit. An order proceeding on the basis that the entire credit was recoverable under Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 could not stand without reconsideration in light of that precedent. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication by the original authority after applying the correct legal basis and granting the assessee a hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 07 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248747