https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373738 The judgment favored the appellant on various grounds. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to proper record maintenance, resulting in the setting aside of the penalty under Rule 15 of CCR 2004. The admissibility of Cenvat Credit for repair and maintenance services was upheld, leading to the rejection of the demand. Additionally, interest on the unutilized amount was deemed not applicable. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, ultimately allowing the appeal and providing consequential benefits. en-us Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jan 2019 07:54:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373738 The judgment favored the appellant on various grounds. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to proper record maintenance, resulting in the setting aside of the penalty under Rule 15 of CCR 2004. The admissibility of Cenvat Credit for repair and maintenance services was upheld, leading to the rejection of the demand. Additionally, interest on the unutilized amount was deemed not applicable. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, ultimately allowing the appeal and providing consequential benefits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373738