https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244175 CENVAT credit on eligible input services used to manufacture job-worked goods cleared under the job-work exemption notification remains admissible; Rule 6(1) cannot deny credit merely because the goods are cleared under that notification. Job-work activity constituting manufacture under excise law cannot simultaneously be characterised as Business Auxiliary Service for the same activity. Accordingly, treating the activity as exempted or non-taxable output service to restrict input-service credit is not sustainable. The demand, interest and penalty were set aside, and the appeal succeeded. en-us Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244175 CENVAT credit on eligible input services used to manufacture job-worked goods cleared under the job-work exemption notification remains admissible; Rule 6(1) cannot deny credit merely because the goods are cleared under that notification. Job-work activity constituting manufacture under excise law cannot simultaneously be characterised as Business Auxiliary Service for the same activity. Accordingly, treating the activity as exempted or non-taxable output service to restrict input-service credit is not sustainable. The demand, interest and penalty were set aside, and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244175