https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266404 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the denial of CENVAT credit on items like MS Channels, Angles, M.S. Bars was unjustified. The appellant successfully demonstrated that these items were used as accessories in machinery fabrication, not as building material, supported by relevant case law. The Tribunal found the demand barred by limitation to be unsustainable, emphasizing the appellant's valid use of the items and the influence of legal precedent on the decision. en-us Mon, 01 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 20:39:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266404 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the denial of CENVAT credit on items like MS Channels, Angles, M.S. Bars was unjustified. The appellant successfully demonstrated that these items were used as accessories in machinery fabrication, not as building material, supported by relevant case law. The Tribunal found the demand barred by limitation to be unsustainable, emphasizing the appellant's valid use of the items and the influence of legal precedent on the decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266404