https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245513 CESTAT Mumbai held that trading of motor vehicles is not a service and thus not an exempted service prior to 1.4.2011; the amended provision effective from 1.4.2011 does not apply retrospectively. For the disputed period, credit on common input services must be apportioned based on the turnover ratio of manufactured and traded vehicles. The extended period of limitation was correctly invoked as the assessee did not disclose credit taken on input services related exclusively to trading in returns or documents. Penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 15 was upheld. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Jul 2025 15:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245513 CESTAT Mumbai held that trading of motor vehicles is not a service and thus not an exempted service prior to 1.4.2011; the amended provision effective from 1.4.2011 does not apply retrospectively. For the disputed period, credit on common input services must be apportioned based on the turnover ratio of manufactured and traded vehicles. The extended period of limitation was correctly invoked as the assessee did not disclose credit taken on input services related exclusively to trading in returns or documents. Penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 15 was upheld. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245513