https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445113 The CESTAT Mumbai held that removal of epoxy moulds to automobile seat part manufacturers without CENVAT credit reversal was permissible under rule 4(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal found that rule 9(3) regarding inputs removed as such did not apply since moulds were not sold to vendors. The removal to job-workers was governed by rule 4(5), which permits credit retention temporarily with reversal upon deadline completion if goods are not returned. The 2010 amendment was deemed clarificatory rather than substantive. The original order was set aside and remanded for fresh determination based on transaction facts. en-us Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Oct 2023 18:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445113 The CESTAT Mumbai held that removal of epoxy moulds to automobile seat part manufacturers without CENVAT credit reversal was permissible under rule 4(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal found that rule 9(3) regarding inputs removed as such did not apply since moulds were not sold to vendors. The removal to job-workers was governed by rule 4(5), which permits credit retention temporarily with reversal upon deadline completion if goods are not returned. The 2010 amendment was deemed clarificatory rather than substantive. The original order was set aside and remanded for fresh determination based on transaction facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445113