https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233498 The Tribunal held that the appellant's activity constituted a taxable service under "Business Auxiliary Service" for which service tax was paid. However, the Cenvat credit taken without specified documents under Rule 9(1) was deemed invalid. The Tribunal also ruled that the extended period could be invoked for demanding improperly taken credits and imposing penalties due to the appellant's actions. Ultimately, the appeal was rejected, and the penalty was upheld. en-us Wed, 30 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 May 2013 07:54:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233498 The Tribunal held that the appellant's activity constituted a taxable service under "Business Auxiliary Service" for which service tax was paid. However, the Cenvat credit taken without specified documents under Rule 9(1) was deemed invalid. The Tribunal also ruled that the extended period could be invoked for demanding improperly taken credits and imposing penalties due to the appellant's actions. Ultimately, the appeal was rejected, and the penalty was upheld. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 30 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233498