https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447156 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that confirmed the demands of Rs.1,15,689/- and Rs.2,91,476/-, including interest and penalty, under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It held that the Appellant could use Cenvat credit to pay duty during the period specified under Rule 8(3A), as the rule was declared ultra vires by the Calcutta HC. Consequently, no interest or penalty was imposed, and the appeals were allowed, aligning with the precedent set by the HC and a similar Tribunal decision. en-us Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:35:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447156 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that confirmed the demands of Rs.1,15,689/- and Rs.2,91,476/-, including interest and penalty, under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It held that the Appellant could use Cenvat credit to pay duty during the period specified under Rule 8(3A), as the rule was declared ultra vires by the Calcutta HC. Consequently, no interest or penalty was imposed, and the appeals were allowed, aligning with the precedent set by the HC and a similar Tribunal decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447156