https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335737 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal regarding irregular Cenvat credit availment, emphasizing the need to determine credit eligibility based on item nature. It considered the pre-restriction period for construction items, recognizing eligibility under inputs or capital goods category. Regarding the limitation period, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating the absence of evidence for deliberate suppression, rendering the demand time-barred. The department's appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of accurate credit categorization and stringent limitation period interpretation. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Dec 2016 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335737 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal regarding irregular Cenvat credit availment, emphasizing the need to determine credit eligibility based on item nature. It considered the pre-restriction period for construction items, recognizing eligibility under inputs or capital goods category. Regarding the limitation period, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating the absence of evidence for deliberate suppression, rendering the demand time-barred. The department's appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of accurate credit categorization and stringent limitation period interpretation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335737