https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75936 A dispute on denial of CENVAT credit on input services was held not to justify insistence on pre-deposit where the issue appeared covered by earlier Tribunal precedent and the Commissioner (Appeals) had recorded no findings on merits. The Tribunal held that, in such circumstances, the merits could not be examined at the pre-deposit stage and a conditional hearing was unwarranted. The pre-deposit direction was set aside, and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits without requiring any pre-deposit. en-us Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75936 A dispute on denial of CENVAT credit on input services was held not to justify insistence on pre-deposit where the issue appeared covered by earlier Tribunal precedent and the Commissioner (Appeals) had recorded no findings on merits. The Tribunal held that, in such circumstances, the merits could not be examined at the pre-deposit stage and a conditional hearing was unwarranted. The pre-deposit direction was set aside, and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits without requiring any pre-deposit. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75936