https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359277 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the denial of Cenvat credit on structural items used in the fabrication of a cooling bed. It held that the items were Cenvatable, barred by limitation, and lacked evidence of suppression. Disallowance based on a Chartered Engineer certificate was rejected, citing precedents. The invocation of a longer period for demand was deemed invalid as there was no evidence of suppression. Denial of credit for MS round lacked proof of consumption by the appellant, shifting the burden of proof to the Revenue. The appeal was granted with consequential relief due to the lack of evidence supporting Revenue's demands. en-us Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359277 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the denial of Cenvat credit on structural items used in the fabrication of a cooling bed. It held that the items were Cenvatable, barred by limitation, and lacked evidence of suppression. Disallowance based on a Chartered Engineer certificate was rejected, citing precedents. The invocation of a longer period for demand was deemed invalid as there was no evidence of suppression. Denial of credit for MS round lacked proof of consumption by the appellant, shifting the burden of proof to the Revenue. The appeal was granted with consequential relief due to the lack of evidence supporting Revenue's demands. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359277