https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753278 CESTAT Allahabad allowed appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial on inputs used for fabricating support structures for plant and machinery during 2005-08. Revenue denied credit citing exclusion clause in Explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal held that revenue's reliance on 2012 circulars was misplaced as they applied to changed rule definitions post-dispute period. Following SC precedent in Rajasthan Spinning case and Madras HC decisions, tribunal ruled that inputs for fabricating support structures qualify for CENVAT credit under Rule 2(a)(A) and 2(k), being integral to capital goods. Impugned order set aside. en-us Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 May 2024 22:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753278 CESTAT Allahabad allowed appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial on inputs used for fabricating support structures for plant and machinery during 2005-08. Revenue denied credit citing exclusion clause in Explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal held that revenue's reliance on 2012 circulars was misplaced as they applied to changed rule definitions post-dispute period. Following SC precedent in Rajasthan Spinning case and Madras HC decisions, tribunal ruled that inputs for fabricating support structures qualify for CENVAT credit under Rule 2(a)(A) and 2(k), being integral to capital goods. Impugned order set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753278