TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Appellant : Amit Mahajan ORDER The appeal by the revenue arises from a judgement of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 23 September 2013. The revenue has framed four questions of law. The first is comprehensive enough to cover the controversy in appeal and is particularly pressed: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case the CESTAT, New Delhi was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 4 or Section 4A of the Act as the case may be or such removal shall be made under invoice refer to in Rule 7." In the present case, the assessee is a manufacturer of television sets. The assessee had purchased components of television sets on which cenvat credit had been availed of. These, however, were not used in the manufacture of final products for the reason that the model for which th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of Rs.22.20 lacs was found to be correct. However, the Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation should not be invoked. In this regard, the reasoning of the Tribunal is that until the issue was settled by the larger Bench in its decision in Eicher Tractor (supra), there were conflicting judgements of the Tribunal as a result of which the extended period of limitation could not be invo....