https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266713 Credit on imported capital goods was held admissible where the bill of entry had been produced when credit was taken, and later non-availability of the triplicate copy did not by itself disprove compliance. In the absence of evidence of suppression or misstatement, the extended period of limitation was not available to the Revenue. Credit was also upheld on capital goods used for job work because the record did not show exclusive use for exempted manufacture, the output was treated as dutiable in the customer's hands, and the assessee had disclosed the activity. After reversal of the credit on shifting the machines, no demand survived. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 May 2016 13:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266713 Credit on imported capital goods was held admissible where the bill of entry had been produced when credit was taken, and later non-availability of the triplicate copy did not by itself disprove compliance. In the absence of evidence of suppression or misstatement, the extended period of limitation was not available to the Revenue. Credit was also upheld on capital goods used for job work because the record did not show exclusive use for exempted manufacture, the output was treated as dutiable in the customer's hands, and the assessee had disclosed the activity. After reversal of the credit on shifting the machines, no demand survived. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266713