https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191092 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant on both the merits and limitation issues. It held that the disputed goods qualified as inputs for cenvat credit, used in construction and repair activities within the factory. The Tribunal found that the appellant had disclosed cenvat particulars, making the extended limitation period inapplicable. The decision emphasizes the importance of correctly categorizing goods for credit eligibility and timely issuance of Show Cause Notices within the limitation period, promoting compliance and transparency in dealings with tax authorities. en-us Tue, 07 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:55:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191092 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant on both the merits and limitation issues. It held that the disputed goods qualified as inputs for cenvat credit, used in construction and repair activities within the factory. The Tribunal found that the appellant had disclosed cenvat particulars, making the extended limitation period inapplicable. The decision emphasizes the importance of correctly categorizing goods for credit eligibility and timely issuance of Show Cause Notices within the limitation period, promoting compliance and transparency in dealings with tax authorities. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191092