https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267956 Wrongly utilised CENVAT credit was not confirmed as demand because the credit was available to the assessee in the succeeding period and the early utilisation did not create any additional substantive entitlement. The demand was therefore set aside. Repeated mis-utilisation of credit over several months nevertheless justified penalty for breach of the CENVAT credit rules, although the Tribunal took a lenient view on quantum because the assessee had sufficient PLA balance and had paid interest. The penalty was sustained but reduced to Rs. 10,000, reflecting partial relief while recognising continued contravention. en-us Wed, 27 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 09:35:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267956 Wrongly utilised CENVAT credit was not confirmed as demand because the credit was available to the assessee in the succeeding period and the early utilisation did not create any additional substantive entitlement. The demand was therefore set aside. Repeated mis-utilisation of credit over several months nevertheless justified penalty for breach of the CENVAT credit rules, although the Tribunal took a lenient view on quantum because the assessee had sufficient PLA balance and had paid interest. The penalty was sustained but reduced to Rs. 10,000, reflecting partial relief while recognising continued contravention. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267956