https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364062 The High Court dismissed the appellant's case, upholding the decisions of lower authorities in disallowing Cenvat Credit due to insufficient evidence of sales returns. The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision, allowing credit only where goods return was proven. The extended period was justified for alleged suppression of facts, and the Court rejected claims of authorities exceeding their scope. Clarifications on abbreviations were provided, emphasizing the need for clear evidence. The appeal was deemed lacking merit, with no significant legal issues raised for further consideration. en-us Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364062 The High Court dismissed the appellant's case, upholding the decisions of lower authorities in disallowing Cenvat Credit due to insufficient evidence of sales returns. The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision, allowing credit only where goods return was proven. The extended period was justified for alleged suppression of facts, and the Court rejected claims of authorities exceeding their scope. Clarifications on abbreviations were provided, emphasizing the need for clear evidence. The appeal was deemed lacking merit, with no significant legal issues raised for further consideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364062