https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393005 The tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 15 (2) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, as there was no evidence of malafide intent to evade duty. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the absence of fraud or willful misstatement, resulting in the annulment of the penalty. The tribunal also upheld that Rule 15 (1) of CCR 2004 applies only when CENVAT credit is misused, dismissing the revenue's appeal and affirming the demands within the normal limitation period. en-us Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Mar 2020 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393005 The tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 15 (2) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, as there was no evidence of malafide intent to evade duty. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the absence of fraud or willful misstatement, resulting in the annulment of the penalty. The tribunal also upheld that Rule 15 (1) of CCR 2004 applies only when CENVAT credit is misused, dismissing the revenue's appeal and affirming the demands within the normal limitation period. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393005