https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402011 The Tribunal set aside the confirmation of demand for irregular Cenvat credit under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, along with penalties and interest. The appellant's argument that the demand was unjustified due to excise duty payment on imported pipes was accepted. The Tribunal held that once duty was paid and accepted, the activities could not be considered trading, thus ruling in favor of the appellant. Moreover, the proceedings were deemed unsustainable due to the department's prior knowledge of the appellant's activities, leading to the appeal being disposed of in favor of the appellant with possible consequential benefits. en-us Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:09:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402011 The Tribunal set aside the confirmation of demand for irregular Cenvat credit under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, along with penalties and interest. The appellant's argument that the demand was unjustified due to excise duty payment on imported pipes was accepted. The Tribunal held that once duty was paid and accepted, the activities could not be considered trading, thus ruling in favor of the appellant. Moreover, the proceedings were deemed unsustainable due to the department's prior knowledge of the appellant's activities, leading to the appeal being disposed of in favor of the appellant with possible consequential benefits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402011