https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31326 The appeal filed by the Revenue against the order setting aside the demand and penalty on the grounds of limitation for duty paid on capital goods was unsuccessful. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision that the extended period under Section 11AC was not justified due to procedural irregularities by the respondents in claiming credit without physically receiving the goods. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the Department's argument regarding the admissibility of credit on repair charges was not comparable to the facts of the case, leading to the appeal failing on both merits and limitation grounds. en-us Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31326 The appeal filed by the Revenue against the order setting aside the demand and penalty on the grounds of limitation for duty paid on capital goods was unsuccessful. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision that the extended period under Section 11AC was not justified due to procedural irregularities by the respondents in claiming credit without physically receiving the goods. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the Department's argument regarding the admissibility of credit on repair charges was not comparable to the facts of the case, leading to the appeal failing on both merits and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31326