https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764868 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal of a 100% EOU challenging demand for cenvat credit reversal. The appellant had reversed cenvat credit, made payments with interest, then took proportionate re-credit without following Section 11B refund procedures. CESTAT held that suo-moto re-credit is permissible when original credit was eligible and reversal was merely accounting entry. The tribunal found no willful misstatement warranting extended limitation period invocation. Since the show cause notice dated 11.09.2013 was issued beyond normal limitation period for credit taken in December 2009, the demand of Rs.40,64,459/- under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11A penalties were held untenable and barred by limitation. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jan 2025 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764868 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal of a 100% EOU challenging demand for cenvat credit reversal. The appellant had reversed cenvat credit, made payments with interest, then took proportionate re-credit without following Section 11B refund procedures. CESTAT held that suo-moto re-credit is permissible when original credit was eligible and reversal was merely accounting entry. The tribunal found no willful misstatement warranting extended limitation period invocation. Since the show cause notice dated 11.09.2013 was issued beyond normal limitation period for credit taken in December 2009, the demand of Rs.40,64,459/- under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11A penalties were held untenable and barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764868