https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201644 Adjudication confirming service tax payment from the CENVAT credit account was set aside because it relied only on a Board circular and did not examine the governing CENVAT Credit Rules, the Service Tax Rules, or the effect of the later amendment under Notification No. 10/2008-C.E. (N.T.). The authority also failed to consider the appellant's contention that, as a manufacturer and recipient liable for GTA service tax, it could use CENVAT credit for payment. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant and considering the statutory scheme and submissions. en-us Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:28:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201644 Adjudication confirming service tax payment from the CENVAT credit account was set aside because it relied only on a Board circular and did not examine the governing CENVAT Credit Rules, the Service Tax Rules, or the effect of the later amendment under Notification No. 10/2008-C.E. (N.T.). The authority also failed to consider the appellant's contention that, as a manufacturer and recipient liable for GTA service tax, it could use CENVAT credit for payment. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant and considering the statutory scheme and submissions. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201644