https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1974 Removal of capital goods on which Cenvat credit had been taken required full reversal of the credit under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Payment of duty only on the depreciated value was not an acceptable substitute where the goods were removed as such within the meaning of the rule, and prior use did not change that position. The demand for reversal of credit was sustained, while the penalty was not sustained and interest on the differential duty remained payable in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1974 Removal of capital goods on which Cenvat credit had been taken required full reversal of the credit under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Payment of duty only on the depreciated value was not an acceptable substitute where the goods were removed as such within the meaning of the rule, and prior use did not change that position. The demand for reversal of credit was sustained, while the penalty was not sustained and interest on the differential duty remained payable in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1974