https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240245 Trading in imported goods could not be treated as exempted goods or exempted service for Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, because such goods were not excisable and the assessee had not taken ineligible credit on the trading activity; the demand under Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3) therefore failed. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the department had prior knowledge of the assessee's credit allocation method from earlier audit and proceedings, so the necessary ingredients for extended limitation were not established. The demands failed on merits and on limitation, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 28 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240245 Trading in imported goods could not be treated as exempted goods or exempted service for Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, because such goods were not excisable and the assessee had not taken ineligible credit on the trading activity; the demand under Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3) therefore failed. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the department had prior knowledge of the assessee's credit allocation method from earlier audit and proceedings, so the necessary ingredients for extended limitation were not established. The demands failed on merits and on limitation, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240245