https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53318 Cenvat credit was held admissible where duty had been paid on the inputs, credit had been taken, and duty was again discharged on clearance of the processed cables. The Tribunal noted that the department could not collect central excise duty on the final clearances and simultaneously deny credit on the ground that the activity did not amount to manufacture. It also referred to Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which required payment of an amount equal to duty where inputs are removed as such. The overall position was treated as revenue neutral, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected, sustaining the assessee's credit entitlement. en-us Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53318 Cenvat credit was held admissible where duty had been paid on the inputs, credit had been taken, and duty was again discharged on clearance of the processed cables. The Tribunal noted that the department could not collect central excise duty on the final clearances and simultaneously deny credit on the ground that the activity did not amount to manufacture. It also referred to Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which required payment of an amount equal to duty where inputs are removed as such. The overall position was treated as revenue neutral, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected, sustaining the assessee's credit entitlement. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53318