https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266277 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and providing consequential relief to the appellant. It was held that the appellant had mistakenly taken excess cenvat credit, not intentionally, and had promptly rectified the error upon identification. As the excess credit was reversed with interest, the extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, and penalties under relevant rules and acts were not imposed. The decision highlighted the difference between inadvertent errors and deliberate misconduct, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellant. en-us Fri, 22 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:27:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266277 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and providing consequential relief to the appellant. It was held that the appellant had mistakenly taken excess cenvat credit, not intentionally, and had promptly rectified the error upon identification. As the excess credit was reversed with interest, the extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, and penalties under relevant rules and acts were not imposed. The decision highlighted the difference between inadvertent errors and deliberate misconduct, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266277