https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258358 Eligibility for CENVAT credit on capital goods was tested by reference to the dutiability of the final product when the goods were received; because the capital goods were received and used for exempt production, credit was held inadmissible. The assessee's declaration that the goods would not be used exclusively for exempt manufacture was treated as mis-declaration, so the extended period of limitation was upheld. Penalty on the employee under Rule 209A was not sustained, as the employee was only an officer of the company and no separate basis was shown to retain that penalty. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2015 06:01:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258358 Eligibility for CENVAT credit on capital goods was tested by reference to the dutiability of the final product when the goods were received; because the capital goods were received and used for exempt production, credit was held inadmissible. The assessee's declaration that the goods would not be used exclusively for exempt manufacture was treated as mis-declaration, so the extended period of limitation was upheld. Penalty on the employee under Rule 209A was not sustained, as the employee was only an officer of the company and no separate basis was shown to retain that penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258358