https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50305 Disputed credit utilisation on inputs for Flexible Machining Systems is addressed by applying the principle that no duty demand should survive where the assessee shows duty paid through PLA exceeded the credit allegedly diverted and there is no ultimate loss of revenue. The commentary also notes that a demand under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 depends on proof of contravention of Rule 9(1), and that the extended limitation under Section 11A(1) requires established jurisdictional facts. Where such contravention and factual basis are not shown, the demand and penalty are unsustainable. en-us Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:25:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50305 Disputed credit utilisation on inputs for Flexible Machining Systems is addressed by applying the principle that no duty demand should survive where the assessee shows duty paid through PLA exceeded the credit allegedly diverted and there is no ultimate loss of revenue. The commentary also notes that a demand under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 depends on proof of contravention of Rule 9(1), and that the extended limitation under Section 11A(1) requires established jurisdictional facts. Where such contravention and factual basis are not shown, the demand and penalty are unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50305