https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337292 The denial of cenvat credit on steel items used for the fabrication of capital goods was at issue. The appellant argued that the disputed goods were used for eligible capital goods and qualified for cenvat credit. The dispute focused on the retrospective or prospective application of an amendment to the definition of inputs. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court clarified that the amendment should be effective from its introduction date. As the disputed goods were procured before the rule amendment, the cenvat benefit could not be denied. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 26 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jan 2017 13:40:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337292 The denial of cenvat credit on steel items used for the fabrication of capital goods was at issue. The appellant argued that the disputed goods were used for eligible capital goods and qualified for cenvat credit. The dispute focused on the retrospective or prospective application of an amendment to the definition of inputs. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court clarified that the amendment should be effective from its introduction date. As the disputed goods were procured before the rule amendment, the cenvat benefit could not be denied. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 26 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337292