https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343555 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting relief to the appellant. It found that the Commissioner failed to prove that the demand was for activities other than clearing inputs after Cenvat credit reversal, as per Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Relying on precedent, the Tribunal held that such clearances do not constitute trading activity. Consequently, the appellant's actions were deemed compliant with the rules, leading to the grant of consequential relief. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 May 2017 07:06:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343555 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting relief to the appellant. It found that the Commissioner failed to prove that the demand was for activities other than clearing inputs after Cenvat credit reversal, as per Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Relying on precedent, the Tribunal held that such clearances do not constitute trading activity. Consequently, the appellant's actions were deemed compliant with the rules, leading to the grant of consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343555