This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Extended period cannot be invoked if divergent views exist even if ultimately Revenue view prevails
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Rathi Steel & Power Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All CESTAT, CESTAT Kolkata
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Advertisement
Rathi Steel & Power Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
As regards invocation of extended period of Limitation, I find that the Appellant had made categorical submissions in this regard which finds mention in the order in appeal but there is no finding on the same. In any case, when the issue is no more res integra that where the assessee is entitled to claim cenvat credit of the tax paid under RCM, there cannot be any question of invocation of extended period. It is also a settled legal position that where there were divergent views on the issue and...




