https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783404 The CESTAT allowed the appeal on limitation, holding that the invocation of the extended period under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unsustainable. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty, as the assessee had regularly filed ER-1 returns, paid duty, and the demand itself was based on records verified by the Department. Consequently, the entire demand of CENVAT credit, along with interest and penalty, was set aside as time-barred, without examining the substantive eligibility of credit on merits. en-us Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Dec 2025 08:19:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783404 The CESTAT allowed the appeal on limitation, holding that the invocation of the extended period under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was unsustainable. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts or intent to evade duty, as the assessee had regularly filed ER-1 returns, paid duty, and the demand itself was based on records verified by the Department. Consequently, the entire demand of CENVAT credit, along with interest and penalty, was set aside as time-barred, without examining the substantive eligibility of credit on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783404