https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373495 Removal of inputs for job work was governed by Rule 4(5)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, because the inputs were sent for further manufacture and not removed as such from the factory. Rule 3(5) therefore did not apply, as that provision covers removal of inputs as such and requires reversal of the credit taken. The later withdrawal of permission could not alter the character of the original job-work removal or defeat otherwise admissible credit on receipt of the inputs. The demand for reversal of CENVAT credit, together with the connected penalty and redemption fine, was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 07 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jan 2019 11:17:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373495 Removal of inputs for job work was governed by Rule 4(5)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, because the inputs were sent for further manufacture and not removed as such from the factory. Rule 3(5) therefore did not apply, as that provision covers removal of inputs as such and requires reversal of the credit taken. The later withdrawal of permission could not alter the character of the original job-work removal or defeat otherwise admissible credit on receipt of the inputs. The demand for reversal of CENVAT credit, together with the connected penalty and redemption fine, was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373495