https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350722 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the denial of Cenvat credit on frames under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The department's contention that painting frames did not constitute manufacturing was rejected, with the Tribunal citing precedent judgments and allowing the credit. The recovery of interest and penalty for short payment of Central Excise duty was upheld, but the penalty was reduced to 25% of the amount, in line with legal provisions and a Supreme Court ruling. The appellant was granted one month to pay the reduced penalty. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350722 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the denial of Cenvat credit on frames under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The department's contention that painting frames did not constitute manufacturing was rejected, with the Tribunal citing precedent judgments and allowing the credit. The recovery of interest and penalty for short payment of Central Excise duty was upheld, but the penalty was reduced to 25% of the amount, in line with legal provisions and a Supreme Court ruling. The appellant was granted one month to pay the reduced penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350722