https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756606 CESTAT Hyderabad remanded the case to the Original Authority for re-examination of CENVAT credit claim on capital goods. The appellant claimed credit based on a Chartered Engineer's certificate, but the tribunal found the certificate insufficient to prove actual usage of components in capital goods fabrication. While the goods theoretically qualified as capital goods components under Rule 2(a)(A)(iii), the certificate lacked corroborative evidence regarding actual utilization, issue registers, technical feasibility, and compatibility with intended equipment. The tribunal directed the Original Authority to verify the certificate against internal records to determine actual usage and re-examine penalty imposition under Section 15(1) of CCR and Section 11AC(1)(a) of Central Excise Act. en-us Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Aug 2024 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756606 CESTAT Hyderabad remanded the case to the Original Authority for re-examination of CENVAT credit claim on capital goods. The appellant claimed credit based on a Chartered Engineer's certificate, but the tribunal found the certificate insufficient to prove actual usage of components in capital goods fabrication. While the goods theoretically qualified as capital goods components under Rule 2(a)(A)(iii), the certificate lacked corroborative evidence regarding actual utilization, issue registers, technical feasibility, and compatibility with intended equipment. The tribunal directed the Original Authority to verify the certificate against internal records to determine actual usage and re-examine penalty imposition under Section 15(1) of CCR and Section 11AC(1)(a) of Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756606