https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772066 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal regarding inadmissible CENVAT credit recovery. The tribunal upheld demands of Rs.1,00,556/- for iron/steel structural items and Rs.1,12,442/- for residential colony security services, finding these credits inadmissible under amended CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. Extended limitation period was properly invoked for both demands with intent to contravene provisions. However, the demand for cross-utilization of Education Cess and SHE Cess credits for central excise duty payment in March 2015 was dropped as time-barred, since utilization was disclosed in ER-1 returns. Penalties and interest on confirmed demands were upheld under Rule 15(2) and Section 11AC. en-us Tue, 20 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jun 2025 08:40:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772066 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal regarding inadmissible CENVAT credit recovery. The tribunal upheld demands of Rs.1,00,556/- for iron/steel structural items and Rs.1,12,442/- for residential colony security services, finding these credits inadmissible under amended CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. Extended limitation period was properly invoked for both demands with intent to contravene provisions. However, the demand for cross-utilization of Education Cess and SHE Cess credits for central excise duty payment in March 2015 was dropped as time-barred, since utilization was disclosed in ER-1 returns. Penalties and interest on confirmed demands were upheld under Rule 15(2) and Section 11AC. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772066