https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235118 The appeal challenged the denial of CENVAT Credit on certain items categorized as non-capital goods. Despite a subsequent adverse ruling, the appellant's reliance on earlier decisions was considered valid. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the limitation period and acknowledged conflicting decisions on the eligibility of CENVAT Credit for steel items. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed based on the limitation issue. The judgment in the case of Salasar Copper was cited, leading to a favorable decision for the appellant. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jul 2013 07:31:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235118 The appeal challenged the denial of CENVAT Credit on certain items categorized as non-capital goods. Despite a subsequent adverse ruling, the appellant's reliance on earlier decisions was considered valid. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the limitation period and acknowledged conflicting decisions on the eligibility of CENVAT Credit for steel items. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed based on the limitation issue. The judgment in the case of Salasar Copper was cited, leading to a favorable decision for the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235118