https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390391 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order. It ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing compliance with CENVAT Credit Rules and the absence of grounds for invoking the extended assessment period. The appellant's method of availing CENVAT credit proportionate to taxable services was deemed compliant with Rule 6(2) of CCR 2004, and previous judicial precedents supported the rational allocation of credit. Regular audits on the appellant's records negated any misstatement or suppression of facts, leading to the Tribunal's decision in favor of the appellant on both merits and limitation grounds. en-us Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jan 2020 16:24:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390391 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order. It ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing compliance with CENVAT Credit Rules and the absence of grounds for invoking the extended assessment period. The appellant's method of availing CENVAT credit proportionate to taxable services was deemed compliant with Rule 6(2) of CCR 2004, and previous judicial precedents supported the rational allocation of credit. Regular audits on the appellant's records negated any misstatement or suppression of facts, leading to the Tribunal's decision in favor of the appellant on both merits and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390391