https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356908 The appellant, engaged in cement and clinker manufacturing, availed excess Cenvat credit by adopting 50% of BCD instead of the prescribed 25% during October 2008 to 4.12.2008. The Tribunal upheld the orders, emphasizing that the appellant could not have foreseen the increase in BCD percentage from 25% to 50% effective from 5.12.2008. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument for retrospective benefit, stating that the prescribed rules must be strictly followed, and benefits cannot be applied retroactively unless explicitly provided for. The appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and timelines in availing tax benefits. en-us Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Mar 2019 15:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356908 The appellant, engaged in cement and clinker manufacturing, availed excess Cenvat credit by adopting 50% of BCD instead of the prescribed 25% during October 2008 to 4.12.2008. The Tribunal upheld the orders, emphasizing that the appellant could not have foreseen the increase in BCD percentage from 25% to 50% effective from 5.12.2008. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument for retrospective benefit, stating that the prescribed rules must be strictly followed, and benefits cannot be applied retroactively unless explicitly provided for. The appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and timelines in availing tax benefits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356908