https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328521 The Tribunal held that the appellant was liable to reverse the credit for trading activity but found the demand raised within the extended period unsustainable due to lack of evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. The computation of credit attributable to trading activity should follow the method introduced in Rule 6(3D) post-01/04/2011, applied retroactively. The penalty imposed was deemed unjustified and set aside, with the appellant directed to pay the recomputed credit amount with interest only. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jun 2016 13:19:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328521 The Tribunal held that the appellant was liable to reverse the credit for trading activity but found the demand raised within the extended period unsustainable due to lack of evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. The computation of credit attributable to trading activity should follow the method introduced in Rule 6(3D) post-01/04/2011, applied retroactively. The penalty imposed was deemed unjustified and set aside, with the appellant directed to pay the recomputed credit amount with interest only. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328521