2017 (7) TMI 442

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....present case is that whether the removal of capital goods after use would attract excise duty in terms of Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 during the period January 2005 to May 2005. 2. Shri Mihir Mehta, ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that there is no dispute that the capital goods on which the revenue sought to demand duty were used for substantial period and t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2011 (270) ELT 349 (P&H) 3. Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the impugned order. He submits that even after use by the capital goods its nature remains same, therefore it is to be treated as removal of capital goods 'as such.' Accordingly, the provision of Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is applicable and the appellant was supposed to pay ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed 'as such.' In my considered view the term 'as such' particularly in respect of capital goods means removal of capital goods without putting to use or without installation. Once the capital goods is installed and used for substantial period, the capital goods does not remain 'as such.' If the interpretation of the revenue is accepted, then no capital goods will be other than as such irrespective....