https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184591 The appeal was dismissed as the appellant wrongly availed CENVAT Credit for exempted products, failed to declare the credit correctly, and the extended period for denial of credit was deemed valid. The judge emphasized the appellant's responsibility to correctly avail credit and upheld the invocation of the extended period due to non-disclosure of crucial information regarding the credit availed. Despite the appellant's arguments, the court found the credit inadmissible and affirmed the lower authorities' decisions confirming the demand for the wrongly availed credit. en-us Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Dec 2016 10:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184591 The appeal was dismissed as the appellant wrongly availed CENVAT Credit for exempted products, failed to declare the credit correctly, and the extended period for denial of credit was deemed valid. The judge emphasized the appellant's responsibility to correctly avail credit and upheld the invocation of the extended period due to non-disclosure of crucial information regarding the credit availed. Despite the appellant's arguments, the court found the credit inadmissible and affirmed the lower authorities' decisions confirming the demand for the wrongly availed credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184591