https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341175 The Tribunal upheld the appellant's entitlement to CENVAT Credit on Additional Excise Duty (AED) on sugar but stressed the importance of proper documentation to support the dealer's Certificate. It directed the appellant to provide necessary documents and remitted the case for a fresh review by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also emphasized the need for Central Excise Officers' countersign on the Certificate to safeguard Revenue interests. The dispute over a time-barred demand was set aside, allowing both parties an opportunity to present evidence. en-us Tue, 21 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341175 The Tribunal upheld the appellant's entitlement to CENVAT Credit on Additional Excise Duty (AED) on sugar but stressed the importance of proper documentation to support the dealer's Certificate. It directed the appellant to provide necessary documents and remitted the case for a fresh review by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also emphasized the need for Central Excise Officers' countersign on the Certificate to safeguard Revenue interests. The dispute over a time-barred demand was set aside, allowing both parties an opportunity to present evidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341175