9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee in DHARMPAL SATYAPAL LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., NOIDA [ 2016 (9) TMI 1389 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] was allowed the credit although against those orders, the appeals have been filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals), in that circumstance, when the Revenue is having divergent views on the issue, the extended period of limitation is not applicable - Admittedly, in this case, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otification No.01/10-CE dt.6.2.2010. The appellant procured certain inputs and availed credit of duty paid on these inputs. The case of the Revenue is that during the relevant period i.e. 01.8.2012 to 19.01.2014, an assessee is not entitled to avail credit against the inputs issued by the units, who are availing exemption under Notification No.01/10-CE dt.6.2.2010 and after introduction of Notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... placed assessee where the credit was allowed to them located in the State of Jammu Kashmir, the appeals have been filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. Without going into the merits of the case, I find that similarly placed assessee was allowed the credit although against those orders, the appeals have been filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
