https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762945 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal against Central Excise duty demand for December 2010 to June 2015. The tribunal held that extended limitation period could not be invoked as there was no suppression of facts - the appellant maintained proper books of account, issued invoices, paid VAT, and was registered under various tax laws. CENVAT credit demand was unsustainable as credit was reversed without utilization. Penalties on the firm and personal penalty on partner were set aside due to absence of malafide intent to evade duty. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:15:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762945 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal against Central Excise duty demand for December 2010 to June 2015. The tribunal held that extended limitation period could not be invoked as there was no suppression of facts - the appellant maintained proper books of account, issued invoices, paid VAT, and was registered under various tax laws. CENVAT credit demand was unsustainable as credit was reversed without utilization. Penalties on the firm and personal penalty on partner were set aside due to absence of malafide intent to evade duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762945