https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264534 The appeal involved the admissibility of CENVAT Credit on items used in fabrication of structural items. The Revenue challenged the allowance of credit, arguing it was not admissible as capital goods. The issue of the Commissioner's power to remand the case for verification of facts was also debated. The Judicial Member upheld the Commissioner's decision to remand the matter for verification, emphasizing the need to establish the actual use of the disputed items before making a final determination. The case was remanded to the adjudicating authority for verification, ensuring a thorough examination of the facts before reaching a decision. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2015 00:18:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264534 The appeal involved the admissibility of CENVAT Credit on items used in fabrication of structural items. The Revenue challenged the allowance of credit, arguing it was not admissible as capital goods. The issue of the Commissioner's power to remand the case for verification of facts was also debated. The Judicial Member upheld the Commissioner's decision to remand the matter for verification, emphasizing the need to establish the actual use of the disputed items before making a final determination. The case was remanded to the adjudicating authority for verification, ensuring a thorough examination of the facts before reaching a decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264534