Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The appellant, a public sector undertaking, had availed CENVAT credit on the basis of 'cover notes'. However, there were concerns about potential duplication of credit, as the appellant had also taken credit on the corresponding invoices. The matter was remanded back to the original authority to verify whether credit was taken twice against the same supply of goods/services. Regarding the extended period of limitation and penalties, while the extended period was invokable for inadmissible credit taken, the Tribunal held that the penalty should have been set aside by invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, considering the appellant's status as a public sector undertaking. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in part.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
