https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789141 Removal of inputs as such was treated as a clearance governed by Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, not as trading activity, so reversal under Rule 6(3) was not attracted and the related demand failed. Penalty under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be sustained because duty and interest had been paid before the show cause notice and no fraud, suppression, collusion or wilful misstatement was established. The appeal succeeded with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:53:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789141 Removal of inputs as such was treated as a clearance governed by Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, not as trading activity, so reversal under Rule 6(3) was not attracted and the related demand failed. Penalty under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be sustained because duty and interest had been paid before the show cause notice and no fraud, suppression, collusion or wilful misstatement was established. The appeal succeeded with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789141