https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276239 The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant as the Tribunal concluded that the disputed goods qualified as "input" under the Cenvat Statute, being integral to the manufacture of the final product. The lower authorities' denial of Cenvat credit based on the use of goods for maintenance/repair of capital goods was deemed without merit. The judgment emphasized the importance of understanding the specific use of goods in the manufacturing process and interpreting the term "input" broadly for claiming Cenvat credit. en-us Thu, 19 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Nov 2018 20:07:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276239 The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant as the Tribunal concluded that the disputed goods qualified as "input" under the Cenvat Statute, being integral to the manufacture of the final product. The lower authorities' denial of Cenvat credit based on the use of goods for maintenance/repair of capital goods was deemed without merit. The judgment emphasized the importance of understanding the specific use of goods in the manufacturing process and interpreting the term "input" broadly for claiming Cenvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276239