CESTAT Chennai on CENVAT Credit on Construction Exclusion and Extended Limitation

CESTAT Chennai partly allowed Ramco Cements' appeal against denial of CENVAT credit on contractor services. It clarified that the Rule 2(l) exclusion requires both a specified service and its use for an expressly excluded construction purpose. More significantly, it held that the extended period was unavailable because the Department had access to the relevant records and failed to establish wilful suppression. The demand beyond the normal limitation period was set aside, while the surviving portion was remanded for transaction-level examination.