https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327956 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order in favor of the Respondent, allowing their appeal against the denial of CENVAT Credit on duty paid returned goods. The dispute arose due to the lack of separate records by the Respondent, but as they could demonstrate the use of inputs for manufacturing final products without contravening the CENVAT Credit Rules 2002, the denial was overturned. Precedents cited supported the Respondent's position, emphasizing the lack of necessity for specific record maintenance under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. The Revenue's argument was deemed irrelevant, and the Tribunal dismissed their appeal, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals) decision. en-us Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Oct 2016 14:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327956 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order in favor of the Respondent, allowing their appeal against the denial of CENVAT Credit on duty paid returned goods. The dispute arose due to the lack of separate records by the Respondent, but as they could demonstrate the use of inputs for manufacturing final products without contravening the CENVAT Credit Rules 2002, the denial was overturned. Precedents cited supported the Respondent's position, emphasizing the lack of necessity for specific record maintenance under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. The Revenue's argument was deemed irrelevant, and the Tribunal dismissed their appeal, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals) decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327956