TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e issue is no more res integra, Tribunal in the cases of BHARAT ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, GOODS SERVICE TAX [ 2019 (7) TMI 1084 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] , M/S INDIAN POTASH LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GST, MEERUT [ 2018 (10) TMI 1367 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] , and M/S KELTECH ENERGIES LTD VERSUS C.E,S. T-COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CENTRAL TAX, MANGAL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of six months from the date of issuance of the said invoices. The time limit of six months was introduced vide Notification No. 21/2014-CE(NT) dated 11.7.2014. In fact, by appreciating the assessee s plea that all the invoices in question were issued prior to the said date of issuance of notification and as such the debar introduced by notification would not apply, the original adjudicatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no effect on the invoices issued prior to the said notification. As such, I do find that the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable, in the light of the law declared by the Tribunal in the above referred cases. Accordingly, the same is set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief. ( Dictated pronounced in open Court ) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
