https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365611 Waste and scrap cleared by the appellant were examined for excise duty liability under Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, on the basis that they allegedly arose from capital goods on which credit had been taken. The demand had been raised without first verifying whether the scrap in fact originated from such capital goods, and supporting documents produced at the appellate stage had not been properly examined. As verification of the goods, documents, and earlier Tribunal orders in the appellant's own case was necessary, the dispute could not be finally decided on the existing record. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. en-us Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Aug 2018 06:42:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365611 Waste and scrap cleared by the appellant were examined for excise duty liability under Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, on the basis that they allegedly arose from capital goods on which credit had been taken. The demand had been raised without first verifying whether the scrap in fact originated from such capital goods, and supporting documents produced at the appellate stage had not been properly examined. As verification of the goods, documents, and earlier Tribunal orders in the appellant's own case was necessary, the dispute could not be finally decided on the existing record. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365611