https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338616 The Tribunal held that while credit for unused damaged parts was disallowed, credit for spares used in the capital goods was allowed for further manufacturing. The decision in DCW Ltd. case was distinguished. The Tribunal upheld the order, dismissing the appeal due to suppression of facts, justifying the extended period for demand. The demand was not barred by limitation, and the decision was rendered on 27/01/2017. en-us Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Aug 2017 15:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338616 The Tribunal held that while credit for unused damaged parts was disallowed, credit for spares used in the capital goods was allowed for further manufacturing. The decision in DCW Ltd. case was distinguished. The Tribunal upheld the order, dismissing the appeal due to suppression of facts, justifying the extended period for demand. The demand was not barred by limitation, and the decision was rendered on 27/01/2017. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338616