https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203564 CESTAT held that service tax on GTA services received by the appellant, being payable under section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, had to be discharged in cash and not through Cenvat credit. Since the appellant neither manufactured dutiable final products nor provided taxable output services, input service credit on telephone, security, repair and maintenance, and consultancy services could not be used for payment of tax on GTA services. Consequently, the wrongly utilized credit was recoverable. The SCN was held within limitation. However, penalty under section 78 was set aside, as there was no suppression or intent to evade, given full disclosure in ST-3 returns. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203564 CESTAT held that service tax on GTA services received by the appellant, being payable under section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, had to be discharged in cash and not through Cenvat credit. Since the appellant neither manufactured dutiable final products nor provided taxable output services, input service credit on telephone, security, repair and maintenance, and consultancy services could not be used for payment of tax on GTA services. Consequently, the wrongly utilized credit was recoverable. The SCN was held within limitation. However, penalty under section 78 was set aside, as there was no suppression or intent to evade, given full disclosure in ST-3 returns. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203564