https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330513 Prefabricated building materials used to construct a shed or manufacturing premises were held not to qualify for CENVAT credit. The goods fell under Chapter 94, which is outside the specific tariff entries covered by the definition of capital goods under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and a shed or building used in a factory is not itself capital goods. The alternative claim as inputs under Rule 2(k) also failed because the cited authorities concerned different factual settings, such as inputs linked to capital goods or output services, and did not extend to materials used for erecting factory premises. The operative principle is that credit depends on strict satisfaction of the statutory definition. en-us Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330513 Prefabricated building materials used to construct a shed or manufacturing premises were held not to qualify for CENVAT credit. The goods fell under Chapter 94, which is outside the specific tariff entries covered by the definition of capital goods under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and a shed or building used in a factory is not itself capital goods. The alternative claim as inputs under Rule 2(k) also failed because the cited authorities concerned different factual settings, such as inputs linked to capital goods or output services, and did not extend to materials used for erecting factory premises. The operative principle is that credit depends on strict satisfaction of the statutory definition. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330513