CESTAT adjudicated a case involving CENVAT Credit availment,...

CESTAT adjudicated a case involving CENVAT Credit availment, holding that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 are only admissible as evidence after following strict procedural requirements. The tribunal found no substantive proof of fraudulent credit utilization, emphasizing that invoices and registration documents demonstrated compliance with Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. The department failed to establish deliberate misrepresentation or suppression of facts. Critically, the tribunal noted procedural irregularities in invoking extended period of limitation without concrete investigative evidence. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the appeal, effectively quashing allegations of fraudulent credit availment and nullifying the extended period show cause notice.