https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348226 Cenvat credit on structural steel items used in manufacture was held inadmissible from 7 July 2009, because the amendment to the definition of input was applied prospectively and not treated as clarificatory or retrospective. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked since invoices and Cenvat records had already been produced before the jurisdictional Superintendent, showing departmental awareness of the credit availed and negating suppression. The demand for the normal period was maintained, while the extended-period demand was set aside. en-us Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348226 Cenvat credit on structural steel items used in manufacture was held inadmissible from 7 July 2009, because the amendment to the definition of input was applied prospectively and not treated as clarificatory or retrospective. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked since invoices and Cenvat records had already been produced before the jurisdictional Superintendent, showing departmental awareness of the credit availed and negating suppression. The demand for the normal period was maintained, while the extended-period demand was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348226