https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384233 CENVAT credit on capital goods was treated as available even when taken in February 2016, because the scheme does not prescribe any time limit for taking such credit. The proviso to Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was treated as invalid in light of Gujarat High Court authority, on the basis that it was ultra vires and inconsistent with the CENVAT scheme. As a result, legally available credit could be utilised to discharge excise duty liabilities for earlier months, and the demand, interest and penalty raised by relying on that proviso were set aside. en-us Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:16:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384233 CENVAT credit on capital goods was treated as available even when taken in February 2016, because the scheme does not prescribe any time limit for taking such credit. The proviso to Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was treated as invalid in light of Gujarat High Court authority, on the basis that it was ultra vires and inconsistent with the CENVAT scheme. As a result, legally available credit could be utilised to discharge excise duty liabilities for earlier months, and the demand, interest and penalty raised by relying on that proviso were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384233