https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220357 The judge granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery to the appellant for denied CENVAT credit and penalty. The denial was based on procedural issues with the invoices, but as the services were used in manufacturing without evidence of diversion, the substantive benefit of CENVAT credit was deemed admissible. The judgment highlights the importance of sticking to issues raised in notices and ensuring a clear connection between denied benefits and procedural faults. It stresses the necessity of proving the actual use of services for eligible purposes to support credit admissibility, providing clarity on criteria for granting waivers and stays in such cases. en-us Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:45:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220357 The judge granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery to the appellant for denied CENVAT credit and penalty. The denial was based on procedural issues with the invoices, but as the services were used in manufacturing without evidence of diversion, the substantive benefit of CENVAT credit was deemed admissible. The judgment highlights the importance of sticking to issues raised in notices and ensuring a clear connection between denied benefits and procedural faults. It stresses the necessity of proving the actual use of services for eligible purposes to support credit admissibility, providing clarity on criteria for granting waivers and stays in such cases. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220357