https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447736 CESTAT Chennai partially allowed appellant's appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial on MS angles, channels, and beams used in manufacturing supporting structures of capital goods. The tribunal held that Explanation to Rule 2(k) introduced by Notification No.16/2009-CE dated 07.07.2009 lacks retrospective application, following Madras HC decision in Thiru Arooran Sugars case. Credit was allowed for invoices issued before 07.07.2009 but disallowed for three invoices dated after this notification. The tribunal applied user test principle and rejected retrospective application of the restrictive explanation. en-us Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jan 2024 12:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447736 CESTAT Chennai partially allowed appellant's appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial on MS angles, channels, and beams used in manufacturing supporting structures of capital goods. The tribunal held that Explanation to Rule 2(k) introduced by Notification No.16/2009-CE dated 07.07.2009 lacks retrospective application, following Madras HC decision in Thiru Arooran Sugars case. Credit was allowed for invoices issued before 07.07.2009 but disallowed for three invoices dated after this notification. The tribunal applied user test principle and rejected retrospective application of the restrictive explanation. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447736