https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331500 Extended period of limitation was held inapplicable where CENVAT credit on structural material used in the factory was taken under a bona fide interpretational dispute. The dispute turned on classification and eligibility, with the goods treated as falling under Chapter 84, while Revenue relied on decisions concerning goods under Chapters 72 and 73 that were not specifically covered as capital goods. As different Benches had taken divergent views, the credit claim could not be characterised as mala fide, and the ingredients for invoking the extended period were not satisfied. The demand therefore could not be sustained on limitation. en-us Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Dec 2016 16:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331500 Extended period of limitation was held inapplicable where CENVAT credit on structural material used in the factory was taken under a bona fide interpretational dispute. The dispute turned on classification and eligibility, with the goods treated as falling under Chapter 84, while Revenue relied on decisions concerning goods under Chapters 72 and 73 that were not specifically covered as capital goods. As different Benches had taken divergent views, the credit claim could not be characterised as mala fide, and the ingredients for invoking the extended period were not satisfied. The demand therefore could not be sustained on limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331500