https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758070 The HC dismissed the Revenue's petition regarding CENVAT Credit Rules amendment applicability for 2009, when the amendment was effective only from May 2010 to November 2010. Following precedent from Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem v. M/s. Burn Standard Co., the court found the factual matrix identical. Revenue did not dispute proper credit reversal was attributable to the manufacturer, eliminating grounds for additional demand. The CESTAT order dated 20.03.2012 was confirmed, with substantial questions of law answered in favor of the assessee. en-us Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Sep 2024 17:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758070 The HC dismissed the Revenue's petition regarding CENVAT Credit Rules amendment applicability for 2009, when the amendment was effective only from May 2010 to November 2010. Following precedent from Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem v. M/s. Burn Standard Co., the court found the factual matrix identical. Revenue did not dispute proper credit reversal was attributable to the manufacturer, eliminating grounds for additional demand. The CESTAT order dated 20.03.2012 was confirmed, with substantial questions of law answered in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758070