https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334028 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand confirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I, amounting to &8377; 4,05,063 against the appellants for goods covered by three challans under Rule 4 (5) (a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found the duty demand unjustifiable for one clearance dated before the tariff amendment, clarified that the responsibility for accounting credit availed inputs rested with the principal manufacturer, and emphasized that the delay in filing the declaration by the principal manufacturer alone could not warrant confirming the duty demand. The appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 21 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Nov 2016 15:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334028 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand confirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I, amounting to &8377; 4,05,063 against the appellants for goods covered by three challans under Rule 4 (5) (a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found the duty demand unjustifiable for one clearance dated before the tariff amendment, clarified that the responsibility for accounting credit availed inputs rested with the principal manufacturer, and emphasized that the delay in filing the declaration by the principal manufacturer alone could not warrant confirming the duty demand. The appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334028