https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331718 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, a loss-making company facing financial hardship. The demand of duty under Rule 8(3A) was deemed unsustainable following precedents from the Gujarat and Madras High Courts, which found the rule unconstitutional. The Tribunal set aside the duty and penalty imposed, granting consequential relief to the appellant. The decision, in line with settled positions, resolved the issue in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the incompatibility of Rule 8(3A) with Cenvat credit provisions and constitutional principles. en-us Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Aug 2016 09:50:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331718 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, a loss-making company facing financial hardship. The demand of duty under Rule 8(3A) was deemed unsustainable following precedents from the Gujarat and Madras High Courts, which found the rule unconstitutional. The Tribunal set aside the duty and penalty imposed, granting consequential relief to the appellant. The decision, in line with settled positions, resolved the issue in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the incompatibility of Rule 8(3A) with Cenvat credit provisions and constitutional principles. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331718