https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122666 The judgment ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand of duty and penalty amounting to over Rs. 20 crores. The court considered the activity as trading rather than manufacturing, emphasizing revenue neutrality and the entitlement to CENVAT credit on inputs. The appellants' plea of limitation was accepted, citing a bona fide belief in non-leviability of excise duty. Drawing on precedent, the court highlighted the importance of available credits exceeding demanded duty, ultimately allowing the appeal and rejecting the extended period of limitation invoked by the department. en-us Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:28:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122666 The judgment ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand of duty and penalty amounting to over Rs. 20 crores. The court considered the activity as trading rather than manufacturing, emphasizing revenue neutrality and the entitlement to CENVAT credit on inputs. The appellants' plea of limitation was accepted, citing a bona fide belief in non-leviability of excise duty. Drawing on precedent, the court highlighted the importance of available credits exceeding demanded duty, ultimately allowing the appeal and rejecting the extended period of limitation invoked by the department. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122666