https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355377 The appellant filed a ROM against Order No.A/89512/17/SMB dated 12/09/2017, challenging the denial of credit post the amendment in Rule 2 (k) of Cenvat Credit Rules on 07/07/2009. The Tribunal recognized the appellant's bonafide belief based on previous decisions but held that such belief could not persist post the amendment. The demand for the period before the amendment was set aside, while the demand post that date was upheld, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal with modified penalties. The judgment was delivered on 28/12/2017. en-us Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:33:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355377 The appellant filed a ROM against Order No.A/89512/17/SMB dated 12/09/2017, challenging the denial of credit post the amendment in Rule 2 (k) of Cenvat Credit Rules on 07/07/2009. The Tribunal recognized the appellant's bonafide belief based on previous decisions but held that such belief could not persist post the amendment. The demand for the period before the amendment was set aside, while the demand post that date was upheld, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal with modified penalties. The judgment was delivered on 28/12/2017. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355377