https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754007 The CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of CENVAT credit for the period March 2005 to March 2009. The tribunal held that during the relevant period, there was no requirement under CENVAT Credit Rules for pro-rata distribution or establishing one-to-one correlation between input services and final products, as these restrictions were introduced later through Notification 18/2012. The tribunal also found that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked as there was no evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade tax payment. en-us Thu, 06 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Jun 2024 08:20:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754007 The CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of CENVAT credit for the period March 2005 to March 2009. The tribunal held that during the relevant period, there was no requirement under CENVAT Credit Rules for pro-rata distribution or establishing one-to-one correlation between input services and final products, as these restrictions were introduced later through Notification 18/2012. The tribunal also found that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked as there was no evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade tax payment. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754007