https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253551 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding merit in their argument that the extended period for demand was not applicable due to the lack of positive actions constituting suppression. The tribunal considered the demand potentially time-barred and waived the pre-deposit of adjudicated liabilities, staying the recovery pending the appeal process. The admissibility of Cenvat credit on specific goods was not extensively analyzed, but the tribunal leaned towards waiving the pre-deposit based on the time-bar issue alone. en-us Mon, 08 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2014 16:06:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253551 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding merit in their argument that the extended period for demand was not applicable due to the lack of positive actions constituting suppression. The tribunal considered the demand potentially time-barred and waived the pre-deposit of adjudicated liabilities, staying the recovery pending the appeal process. The admissibility of Cenvat credit on specific goods was not extensively analyzed, but the tribunal leaned towards waiving the pre-deposit based on the time-bar issue alone. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253551