https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354787 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the recovery of cenvat credit amount but setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The dispute centered around the interpretation of Rule 3(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, regarding availing cenvat credit on capital goods sent to a job worker. The Tribunal held that permission granted by Central Excise authorities did not authorize the availing of cenvat credit on capital goods directly received at the job worker's end. The appellant's arguments based on case laws were deemed irrelevant, and a dispute over the date of re-credit for issuing a show cause notice was resolved against the appellant's contentions. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Feb 2018 07:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354787 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the recovery of cenvat credit amount but setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The dispute centered around the interpretation of Rule 3(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, regarding availing cenvat credit on capital goods sent to a job worker. The Tribunal held that permission granted by Central Excise authorities did not authorize the availing of cenvat credit on capital goods directly received at the job worker's end. The appellant's arguments based on case laws were deemed irrelevant, and a dispute over the date of re-credit for issuing a show cause notice was resolved against the appellant's contentions. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354787