https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753434 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal challenging denial of CENVAT credit on certain services. The Revenue had issued a show-cause notice invoking extended limitation period, but the Commissioner had previously dropped a similar notice covering the same period and services, which was upheld by CESTAT. The court held that extended period cannot be invoked repeatedly on the same issue when material facts were already available with the Department, citing Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector. The appellants had availed credit on services integral to their manufacturing business, and CESTAT had previously decided in their favor regarding eligibility of these services for credit. en-us Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Jun 2024 10:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753434 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal challenging denial of CENVAT credit on certain services. The Revenue had issued a show-cause notice invoking extended limitation period, but the Commissioner had previously dropped a similar notice covering the same period and services, which was upheld by CESTAT. The court held that extended period cannot be invoked repeatedly on the same issue when material facts were already available with the Department, citing Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector. The appellants had availed credit on services integral to their manufacturing business, and CESTAT had previously decided in their favor regarding eligibility of these services for credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753434