https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349880 The Tribunal held that Cenvat credit reversal was not required for goods cleared after rectification and duty payment, citing a Bombay High Court decision. However, credit reversal was necessary for goods cleared as scrap without processing under Rule 16(2). As the Department was aware of the scrap clearance, the extended limitation period was inapplicable. Demands within the limitation period were upheld, while penalties and demands beyond the limitation were set aside. The matter was remanded for correct quantification of the demand by the Adjudicating Authority. en-us Tue, 05 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Oct 2017 09:03:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349880 The Tribunal held that Cenvat credit reversal was not required for goods cleared after rectification and duty payment, citing a Bombay High Court decision. However, credit reversal was necessary for goods cleared as scrap without processing under Rule 16(2). As the Department was aware of the scrap clearance, the extended limitation period was inapplicable. Demands within the limitation period were upheld, while penalties and demands beyond the limitation were set aside. The matter was remanded for correct quantification of the demand by the Adjudicating Authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349880