<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Limitation Period for CENVAT Credit Claims Applies Regardless of When Imports Occurred Under Rule 4</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86583</link>
    <description>HC dismissed the petition challenging the Settlement Commission&#039;s rejection of CENVAT credit claims for CVD paid on imported capital goods. Following Osram Surya, the court held that the limitation period introduced via amendment to Rule 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules applies to claims made after the amendment came into force, regardless of when imports occurred. The petitioner&#039;s failure to fulfill export obligations under EPCG scheme for four out of nine licenses, despite receiving an extended period of 8 years, and payment of duty only after DRI investigation commenced, further justified the rejection. The court emphasized the finality of settlement proceedings under Section 127(j) of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:35:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:35:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=807029" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Limitation Period for CENVAT Credit Claims Applies Regardless of When Imports Occurred Under Rule 4</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86583</link>
      <description>HC dismissed the petition challenging the Settlement Commission&#039;s rejection of CENVAT credit claims for CVD paid on imported capital goods. Following Osram Surya, the court held that the limitation period introduced via amendment to Rule 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules applies to claims made after the amendment came into force, regardless of when imports occurred. The petitioner&#039;s failure to fulfill export obligations under EPCG scheme for four out of nine licenses, despite receiving an extended period of 8 years, and payment of duty only after DRI investigation commenced, further justified the rejection. The court emphasized the finality of settlement proceedings under Section 127(j) of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:35:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86583</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>