9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Explanation III in sub-rule6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 w.e.f. 16.5.2005 - HELD THAT:- The questions proposed do not arise for consideration. Appeal disposed off. - CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2020 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2020 - NITIN JAMDAR AND M.S. KARNIK, JJ. Mr. P.S. Jetly, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. J.B. Mishra for the appellant. Mr. Sriram Sridharan for the respondent. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit after insertion of Explanation III in sub-rule6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 w.e.f. 16.5.2005? 3. The learned counsel for the Respondent placed on record the order passed in Central Excise Appeal No.184 of 2019 wherein the Respondent had challenged the very same impugned order. The Appeal was accordingly disposed of by an order dated 16 January 2020. The order reads thus :- He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, CESTAT was correct in denying credit by concluding that expression duty of excise appearing in Rule 2(d) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 / Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 while defining exempted goods , will cover only duty prescribed in the First Schedule and the Second schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 read with Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cember 2019 in CEXA No. 119 of 2007 and others. Hence, it do not arise for consideration in this Appeal. The 4th question of law (d) is as under :- (d) Whether the CESTAT was correct in confirming the invocation of extended period of limitation in the present case despite setting aside the penalty imposed on the Appellants, ingredients for both propositions being the same? This questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
