https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353308 The Tribunal allowed the Appeals challenging the denial of Cenvat credit on capital goods used for electricity generation in Unit II but availed in Unit I. The Tribunal held that the location of capital goods in a sister unit should not be a reason for denying credit, emphasizing that electricity or steam generation within the factory qualifies as an intermediate product. Considering the duty-paid nature of the goods and their usage in the manufacturing process, the Tribunal set aside the Orders-in-Appeal and allowed the Appeals with consequential relief, if any. en-us Wed, 27 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Feb 2018 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353308 The Tribunal allowed the Appeals challenging the denial of Cenvat credit on capital goods used for electricity generation in Unit II but availed in Unit I. The Tribunal held that the location of capital goods in a sister unit should not be a reason for denying credit, emphasizing that electricity or steam generation within the factory qualifies as an intermediate product. Considering the duty-paid nature of the goods and their usage in the manufacturing process, the Tribunal set aside the Orders-in-Appeal and allowed the Appeals with consequential relief, if any. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353308