https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430577 The Tribunal held that Rule 3(5)(B) of CCR, 2004 applies when inventory is fully or partially written off, not when a general provision is made without specific identification. As the appellant had not written off any inventory but only adjusted values in the books, the demand for Cenvat credit reversal was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the demand, clarifying the distinction between making provisions for slow moving/non-moving inventory and writing off inventory. en-us Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Nov 2022 23:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430577 The Tribunal held that Rule 3(5)(B) of CCR, 2004 applies when inventory is fully or partially written off, not when a general provision is made without specific identification. As the appellant had not written off any inventory but only adjusted values in the books, the demand for Cenvat credit reversal was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the demand, clarifying the distinction between making provisions for slow moving/non-moving inventory and writing off inventory. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430577