https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250824 The appellant successfully appealed against the confirmed demand for wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit, interest, and penalty amounting to Rs. 10,96,41,251. The court found that the imported goods were intended for manufacturing activity, supported by the appellant's practice of clearing goods by reversing Cenvat Credit under Rule 3(5). As the department failed to prove that the goods were not issued for production, the court set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the need for evidence to support claims in cases of alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit and the importance of adhering to Cenvat Credit Rules in manufacturing processes. en-us Fri, 11 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Nov 2014 18:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250824 The appellant successfully appealed against the confirmed demand for wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit, interest, and penalty amounting to Rs. 10,96,41,251. The court found that the imported goods were intended for manufacturing activity, supported by the appellant's practice of clearing goods by reversing Cenvat Credit under Rule 3(5). As the department failed to prove that the goods were not issued for production, the court set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the need for evidence to support claims in cases of alleged wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit and the importance of adhering to Cenvat Credit Rules in manufacturing processes. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250824