https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203513 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal against the denial of service tax credit, considering the subsequent payment made to the service provider. However, the interest for the period of wrongful credit utilization and the penalty were upheld. The appellant's argument that they were eligible for credit despite the delayed payment was accepted, distinguishing between credit for inputs and input services. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, regarding precautions before taking credit. en-us Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203513 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal against the denial of service tax credit, considering the subsequent payment made to the service provider. However, the interest for the period of wrongful credit utilization and the penalty were upheld. The appellant's argument that they were eligible for credit despite the delayed payment was accepted, distinguishing between credit for inputs and input services. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, regarding precautions before taking credit. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203513