https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345331 Removal of defective, rejected or waste components as scrap during manufacture was not treated as removal of inputs as such for credit reversal under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The goods were recorded as production waste and rejected components arising in the course of manufacture and testing, and the show cause notice did not specifically allege removal of inputs as such. On those facts, the duty demand and requirement to reverse Cenvat credit were held unsustainable, and the departmental appeal failed while the order setting aside the demand was sustained. en-us Mon, 19 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345331 Removal of defective, rejected or waste components as scrap during manufacture was not treated as removal of inputs as such for credit reversal under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The goods were recorded as production waste and rejected components arising in the course of manufacture and testing, and the show cause notice did not specifically allege removal of inputs as such. On those facts, the duty demand and requirement to reverse Cenvat credit were held unsustainable, and the departmental appeal failed while the order setting aside the demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345331