https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359742 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the demand under Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. The Court found that the Commissioner correctly applied Rule 3(5) instead of Rule 4(5)(A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, noting that the Department could not change its stance at that stage. The Court dismissed the appeals without costs, concluding that the Tribunal had appropriately interpreted the term "Capital goods cleared as such" based on the presented facts. en-us Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359742 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the demand under Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. The Court found that the Commissioner correctly applied Rule 3(5) instead of Rule 4(5)(A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, noting that the Department could not change its stance at that stage. The Court dismissed the appeals without costs, concluding that the Tribunal had appropriately interpreted the term "Capital goods cleared as such" based on the presented facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359742