https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75968 The appellate court allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned order that rejected a refund claim for excess CENVAT credit. The court held that the adjudicating authority had overstepped by denying the refund claim based on non-stipulated grounds not raised in the show-cause notice. It was found that the denial of CENVAT credit and discrepancies in ST-3 were unsustainable. The court also disagreed with the denial of inputs service credit on Rent-a-Cab and Air Travel Service, stating these services were essential for the appellants' business activities, making them eligible for CENVAT credit. Consequently, the appeals were allowed with consequential relief. en-us Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 May 2014 11:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75968 The appellate court allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned order that rejected a refund claim for excess CENVAT credit. The court held that the adjudicating authority had overstepped by denying the refund claim based on non-stipulated grounds not raised in the show-cause notice. It was found that the denial of CENVAT credit and discrepancies in ST-3 were unsustainable. The court also disagreed with the denial of inputs service credit on Rent-a-Cab and Air Travel Service, stating these services were essential for the appellants' business activities, making them eligible for CENVAT credit. Consequently, the appeals were allowed with consequential relief. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75968