https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326571 The tribunal held that Rule 10 of the CENVAT Credit Rules did not apply as only the factory and capital goods were leased, not the inputs. Despite no physical removal, the sale of inputs required duty payment equivalent to the credit taken, benefiting the lessee. The tribunal found no revenue loss and set aside the duty demand and penalty due to lack of malafide intent. The appellant's role as a manufacturer utilizing inputs and discharging duty on final products affirmed the lessee's entitlement to credit on input purchases, leading to the order setting aside the duty demand and penalty. en-us Fri, 08 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326571 The tribunal held that Rule 10 of the CENVAT Credit Rules did not apply as only the factory and capital goods were leased, not the inputs. Despite no physical removal, the sale of inputs required duty payment equivalent to the credit taken, benefiting the lessee. The tribunal found no revenue loss and set aside the duty demand and penalty due to lack of malafide intent. The appellant's role as a manufacturer utilizing inputs and discharging duty on final products affirmed the lessee's entitlement to credit on input purchases, leading to the order setting aside the duty demand and penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326571