https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125684 The Tribunal found that despite the Commissioner (Appeals) granting benefit to the respondents on the entitlement to Modvat credit for fuel used in manufacturing steam, it contradicted the Supreme Court judgment. However, considering the historical context of conflicting decisions, the demand against the respondents was not upheld. Regarding the period of limitation for the show cause notice issued beyond the normal timeframe, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, citing precedents and lack of mala fide intent. The Revenue's appeal was rejected based on the limitation issue, balancing legal principles and historical context. en-us Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Aug 2017 12:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125684 The Tribunal found that despite the Commissioner (Appeals) granting benefit to the respondents on the entitlement to Modvat credit for fuel used in manufacturing steam, it contradicted the Supreme Court judgment. However, considering the historical context of conflicting decisions, the demand against the respondents was not upheld. Regarding the period of limitation for the show cause notice issued beyond the normal timeframe, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, citing precedents and lack of mala fide intent. The Revenue's appeal was rejected based on the limitation issue, balancing legal principles and historical context. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125684