https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359644 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the interpretation of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute revolved around the appellant's clearance of steel sheets with payment of duty, which the department deemed as trading activity subject to penalty. However, the Tribunal held that since the appellant paid duty on the clearances, Rule 6 did not apply, rejecting the department's argument. By emphasizing the distinction between trading activity and duty-paid clearances under Rule 3(5), the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand and penalty imposed by the department. en-us Thu, 19 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Mar 2019 12:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359644 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the interpretation of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute revolved around the appellant's clearance of steel sheets with payment of duty, which the department deemed as trading activity subject to penalty. However, the Tribunal held that since the appellant paid duty on the clearances, Rule 6 did not apply, rejecting the department's argument. By emphasizing the distinction between trading activity and duty-paid clearances under Rule 3(5), the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand and penalty imposed by the department. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359644