https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400132 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of a refund claim under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, citing the limitation period specified in notification 27/2012-C.E. (N.T.). The appellant's argument that the limitation should apply post the issuance of notification 14/2016-C.E. (N.T.) was dismissed. The Tribunal found that the subsequent notification did not alter the limitation for manufacturers, only providing relaxation for service providers. As the appellant, a manufacturer, filed the refund claim beyond the specified limitation period, the appeal was dismissed. en-us Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Oct 2020 09:26:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400132 The Tribunal upheld the rejection of a refund claim under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, citing the limitation period specified in notification 27/2012-C.E. (N.T.). The appellant's argument that the limitation should apply post the issuance of notification 14/2016-C.E. (N.T.) was dismissed. The Tribunal found that the subsequent notification did not alter the limitation for manufacturers, only providing relaxation for service providers. As the appellant, a manufacturer, filed the refund claim beyond the specified limitation period, the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400132