https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392459 The Tribunal upheld the denial of Cenvat Credit for GTA services beyond the place of removal post the 2008 amendment to Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The extended period of limitation was not applicable before May 2010 due to lack of malafide intention, but the demand for the period June 2010 to October 2010 within the normal period was upheld. The appeal was remanded for recalculating the demand for the normal period without imposing any penalty. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:38:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392459 The Tribunal upheld the denial of Cenvat Credit for GTA services beyond the place of removal post the 2008 amendment to Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The extended period of limitation was not applicable before May 2010 due to lack of malafide intention, but the demand for the period June 2010 to October 2010 within the normal period was upheld. The appeal was remanded for recalculating the demand for the normal period without imposing any penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392459