https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354464 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the removal of inputs to sister units did not constitute trading activity as alleged by the department. The Tribunal found that the reversal of CENVAT credit on input services was not justified, emphasizing the compliance with Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the department's order, allowing the appeal and providing clarity on the legal basis for reversing CENVAT credit on input services in such cases. en-us Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 08:41:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354464 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the removal of inputs to sister units did not constitute trading activity as alleged by the department. The Tribunal found that the reversal of CENVAT credit on input services was not justified, emphasizing the compliance with Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the department's order, allowing the appeal and providing clarity on the legal basis for reversing CENVAT credit on input services in such cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354464