https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344865 The appeal was allowed as the Member (Judicial) clarified that Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 did not require duty payment on capital goods cleared after substantial use, as they no longer remained "as such." The judgment aligned with the consistent stance of various High Courts, including Karnataka, Delhi, and Bombay, indicating that duty was not chargeable on the removal of used capital goods. The duty paid by the appellant was deemed unnecessary, and the impugned order was set aside. en-us Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344865 The appeal was allowed as the Member (Judicial) clarified that Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 did not require duty payment on capital goods cleared after substantial use, as they no longer remained "as such." The judgment aligned with the consistent stance of various High Courts, including Karnataka, Delhi, and Bombay, indicating that duty was not chargeable on the removal of used capital goods. The duty paid by the appellant was deemed unnecessary, and the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344865