https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269634 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue. The evidence provided by the respondent before the Commissioner (Appeals) was deemed admissible under Rule 5(4) of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001. It was established that the items in question were used in manufacturing or repair and maintenance of capital goods, justifying the respondent's claim for Cenvat credit. The judgment underscored the significance of considering all pertinent evidence and the actual usage of items in determining eligibility for Cenvat credit. en-us Fri, 16 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269634 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue. The evidence provided by the respondent before the Commissioner (Appeals) was deemed admissible under Rule 5(4) of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001. It was established that the items in question were used in manufacturing or repair and maintenance of capital goods, justifying the respondent's claim for Cenvat credit. The judgment underscored the significance of considering all pertinent evidence and the actual usage of items in determining eligibility for Cenvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269634