https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388310 The Court upheld the respondent manufacturer's claim for input credit for cement used as a stabilization agent for hazardous waste, expanding the definition of "Input" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to include goods used in the factory by the manufacturer of the final product. The Court emphasized compliance with environmental regulations and pollution control, ruling that the use of cement for waste stabilization qualifies as goods used in the manufacturing process. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court finding no merit and no substantial question of law arising from the case. en-us Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Nov 2019 10:06:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388310 The Court upheld the respondent manufacturer's claim for input credit for cement used as a stabilization agent for hazardous waste, expanding the definition of "Input" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to include goods used in the factory by the manufacturer of the final product. The Court emphasized compliance with environmental regulations and pollution control, ruling that the use of cement for waste stabilization qualifies as goods used in the manufacturing process. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court finding no merit and no substantial question of law arising from the case. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388310