https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440087 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demand under Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not sustainable due to the conditional nature of the exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE. The Tribunal held that the appellant had the option to avail the exemption or clear the goods under bond/LUT. Additionally, the eligibility of Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of goods cleared for export under bond was upheld, and the invocation of the extended period of limitation was deemed incorrect. The personal penalty imposed on Shri Vinayak Shirodkar was also set aside. en-us Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jul 2023 08:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440087 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demand under Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not sustainable due to the conditional nature of the exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE. The Tribunal held that the appellant had the option to avail the exemption or clear the goods under bond/LUT. Additionally, the eligibility of Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of goods cleared for export under bond was upheld, and the invocation of the extended period of limitation was deemed incorrect. The personal penalty imposed on Shri Vinayak Shirodkar was also set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440087