https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363298 The appellant inadvertently availed 100% Cenvat Credit on capital goods instead of the permissible 50%. The Tribunal found that the appellant had indeed availed 100% credit but only utilized it for three months. The demand for the entire amount was deemed unjustified, but interest for the utilized amount was upheld. Regarding the Cenvat Credit of duty paid on M.S. Bars, the Tribunal concluded that the M.S. Bars did not qualify as components or accessories of capital goods. The appeal was partly allowed on the first issue, with the appellant held liable for interest on the utilized credit, while the demand for Cenvat Credit on M.S. Bars was upheld. en-us Tue, 26 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:18:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363298 The appellant inadvertently availed 100% Cenvat Credit on capital goods instead of the permissible 50%. The Tribunal found that the appellant had indeed availed 100% credit but only utilized it for three months. The demand for the entire amount was deemed unjustified, but interest for the utilized amount was upheld. Regarding the Cenvat Credit of duty paid on M.S. Bars, the Tribunal concluded that the M.S. Bars did not qualify as components or accessories of capital goods. The appeal was partly allowed on the first issue, with the appellant held liable for interest on the utilized credit, while the demand for Cenvat Credit on M.S. Bars was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363298