Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 2015 - AT - Central ExciseRecovery of CENVAT Credit - time limitation - whether the demand for recovery of CENVAT availed on inadmissible input service, is barred by limitation or otherwise? - allegation also that details of the input service in their monthly returns not disclosed - suppression of facts or not - extended period of limitation. HELD THAT:- This Tribunal in similar circumstances, in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAIPUR-I VERSUS PUSHP ENTERPRISES [2010 (11) TMI 835 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] has held that Just because the respondent had taken Cenvat credit in respect of certain input services, which according to the Department was not admissible to them, it cannot be concluded that the credit had been taken knowing very well that the same was not admissible unless there is some evidence in this regard. Thus, the appellant had availed Cenvat Credit on various input services on the bonafide belief that the same are admissible to them under the definition of inputs services contained in Rule 2(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and declared the quantum of Cenvat Credit in the ER-I Returns. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|