https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, holding that the Cenvat credit for six invoices amounting to Rs. 1.82 lakhs was admissible as the corrections made by the supplier aligned with the facts. However, other demands were confirmed. The penalty under Section 11AC was upheld due to the extended period for suppression of facts, and it could not be reduced or waived. The impugned order was modified accordingly, with the judgment pronounced on 27/9/17. en-us Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Nov 2017 08:36:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, holding that the Cenvat credit for six invoices amounting to Rs. 1.82 lakhs was admissible as the corrections made by the supplier aligned with the facts. However, other demands were confirmed. The penalty under Section 11AC was upheld due to the extended period for suppression of facts, and it could not be reduced or waived. The impugned order was modified accordingly, with the judgment pronounced on 27/9/17. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350359