https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372252 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order confirming a demand under the Central Excise Act. It was established that availing Cenvat credit on returned goods for specific purposes did not require formal documentation beyond what was prescribed by Rule 16. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents to rule that no intimation was necessary for goods received for remaking, refining, or reconditioning. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits, emphasizing adherence to Rule 16 without additional documentation requirements. en-us Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Dec 2018 06:42:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372252 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order confirming a demand under the Central Excise Act. It was established that availing Cenvat credit on returned goods for specific purposes did not require formal documentation beyond what was prescribed by Rule 16. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents to rule that no intimation was necessary for goods received for remaking, refining, or reconditioning. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits, emphasizing adherence to Rule 16 without additional documentation requirements. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372252