https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339186 On removal of inputs as such, duty liability is confined to the Cenvat credit availed on those inputs and does not extend to the transaction value by adding further charges recovered on clearance. Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 3(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 2001/Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 create a deeming fiction only for the manner of removal; they do not treat the buyer of the inputs as their manufacturer for valuation. As the inputs were manufactured by the supplier, the duty payable on such removal cannot exceed the embedded credit element. The Larger Bench view was followed, limiting duty to the credit taken. en-us Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Feb 2017 23:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339186 On removal of inputs as such, duty liability is confined to the Cenvat credit availed on those inputs and does not extend to the transaction value by adding further charges recovered on clearance. Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 3(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 2001/Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 create a deeming fiction only for the manner of removal; they do not treat the buyer of the inputs as their manufacturer for valuation. As the inputs were manufactured by the supplier, the duty payable on such removal cannot exceed the embedded credit element. The Larger Bench view was followed, limiting duty to the credit taken. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339186