https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370861 The demand for the post-1-3-2015 period required fresh examination because the earlier drop was based on the incorrect assumption that the entire dispute fell before that date. Explanation 1 inserted into Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not examined for the later period, so that part of the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration of the amended rule's applicability. en-us Thu, 20 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:56:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370861 The demand for the post-1-3-2015 period required fresh examination because the earlier drop was based on the incorrect assumption that the entire dispute fell before that date. Explanation 1 inserted into Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not examined for the later period, so that part of the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration of the amended rule's applicability. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370861