https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334213 Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 permits recovery only to the extent credit is actually involved in inputs or capital goods. Where the department did not quantify the credit attributable to goods allegedly retained by a job worker and instead based the demand on the value of waste, residue and scrap, the demand was unsustainable and failed on merits. Separately, the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the notice contained no allegation of suppression, wilful misstatement, collusion or fraud. The demand was therefore time barred and the assessee succeeded on both merits and limitation. en-us Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334213 Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 permits recovery only to the extent credit is actually involved in inputs or capital goods. Where the department did not quantify the credit attributable to goods allegedly retained by a job worker and instead based the demand on the value of waste, residue and scrap, the demand was unsustainable and failed on merits. Separately, the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the notice contained no allegation of suppression, wilful misstatement, collusion or fraud. The demand was therefore time barred and the assessee succeeded on both merits and limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334213