https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280276 Under Rule 57U of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, where no return under Rule 57T(10) was filed, the notice had to be issued within six months from the last date on which the return was required to be filed. The dispute concerned credit taken on capital goods imported under the Project Import Scheme, and the notice was issued beyond that six-month period. The Tribunal followed the earlier interpretation of the same limitation scheme and held that the relevant date was the due date for filing the return, not the date of actual filing. The demand for reversal of credit was therefore time barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s limitation finding was upheld. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 28 Apr 2019 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280276 Under Rule 57U of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, where no return under Rule 57T(10) was filed, the notice had to be issued within six months from the last date on which the return was required to be filed. The dispute concerned credit taken on capital goods imported under the Project Import Scheme, and the notice was issued beyond that six-month period. The Tribunal followed the earlier interpretation of the same limitation scheme and held that the relevant date was the due date for filing the return, not the date of actual filing. The demand for reversal of credit was therefore time barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s limitation finding was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280276