https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192088 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision and rejected the Revenue's appeal regarding the liability to reverse credit availed for inputs written off during April 1999 to December 2000. Relying on the decision in BHEL v. CCE [2002 (50) RLT 208 (Tri.)], the Tribunal clarified that Cenvat credit cannot be demanded when inputs are written off and that Rule 3(5)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules introduced in 2008 does not apply retrospectively. Therefore, the respondents were not required to reverse the credit availed for inputs written off during the specified period. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 May 2017 08:51:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192088 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision and rejected the Revenue's appeal regarding the liability to reverse credit availed for inputs written off during April 1999 to December 2000. Relying on the decision in BHEL v. CCE [2002 (50) RLT 208 (Tri.)], the Tribunal clarified that Cenvat credit cannot be demanded when inputs are written off and that Rule 3(5)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules introduced in 2008 does not apply retrospectively. Therefore, the respondents were not required to reverse the credit availed for inputs written off during the specified period. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192088