https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383849 The HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 174(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, against the CESTAT's order. The HC upheld CESTAT's decision, aligning with the precedent set in Principal Commissioner vs. M/s Alembic Ltd, which mandates refunding reversed credit amounts if not required by law. The Court emphasized adherence to Cenvat Credit Rules and proper credit treatment, affirming CESTAT's compliance with established legal principles. Consequently, the connected civil application was also disposed of, reinforcing the legal framework governing Cenvat Credit. en-us Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2024 16:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383849 The HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 174(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, against the CESTAT's order. The HC upheld CESTAT's decision, aligning with the precedent set in Principal Commissioner vs. M/s Alembic Ltd, which mandates refunding reversed credit amounts if not required by law. The Court emphasized adherence to Cenvat Credit Rules and proper credit treatment, affirming CESTAT's compliance with established legal principles. Consequently, the connected civil application was also disposed of, reinforcing the legal framework governing Cenvat Credit. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383849