https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433299 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant on multiple issues. It held that the appellant, having reversed the entire credit of common input services, was not liable to pay 10% of the value of exempted goods. The demand raised beyond the limitation period was deemed time-barred, as there was no suppression of facts. The Tribunal also concluded that there was no suppression of facts by the appellant and that the reversal of entire credit on common input services needed reevaluation. Additionally, the personal penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside due to the lack of sustainable demand. The matter was remanded for further consideration. en-us Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2023 08:32:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433299 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant on multiple issues. It held that the appellant, having reversed the entire credit of common input services, was not liable to pay 10% of the value of exempted goods. The demand raised beyond the limitation period was deemed time-barred, as there was no suppression of facts. The Tribunal also concluded that there was no suppression of facts by the appellant and that the reversal of entire credit on common input services needed reevaluation. Additionally, the personal penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside due to the lack of sustainable demand. The matter was remanded for further consideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433299