https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257537 The judge dismissed the Revenue's appeal and resolved the respondent's Cross Objection in favor of the respondent. The case centered on the respondent's entitlement to CENVAT Credit for iron ore pellets, despite the supplier charging excess duty. The judge ruled that the respondent correctly claimed credit for the actual duty paid, in line with the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. Emphasizing adherence to these rules, the judgment clarified the distinction between duties paid by the supplier and the assessee's entitlement to credit. The decision upheld the respondent's right to the credit, highlighting the importance of following prescribed rules for CENVAT Credit eligibility. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Mar 2015 07:03:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257537 The judge dismissed the Revenue's appeal and resolved the respondent's Cross Objection in favor of the respondent. The case centered on the respondent's entitlement to CENVAT Credit for iron ore pellets, despite the supplier charging excess duty. The judge ruled that the respondent correctly claimed credit for the actual duty paid, in line with the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. Emphasizing adherence to these rules, the judgment clarified the distinction between duties paid by the supplier and the assessee's entitlement to credit. The decision upheld the respondent's right to the credit, highlighting the importance of following prescribed rules for CENVAT Credit eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257537