https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251752 For post-1.6.2007 contracts, the taxable activity fell under works contract service, and tax discharged under the composition scheme could not be demanded again merely because the contract documents were doubted; the matter was remitted for verification of the contracts. Reversal of Cenvat credit was treated as non-availment of credit, so abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST could not be denied on that basis. A further demand for credit actually utilized could not be confirmed in addition to a disallowance of the same credit, as that would create a double demand; the matter required fresh scrutiny of the credit records. en-us Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:55:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251752 For post-1.6.2007 contracts, the taxable activity fell under works contract service, and tax discharged under the composition scheme could not be demanded again merely because the contract documents were doubted; the matter was remitted for verification of the contracts. Reversal of Cenvat credit was treated as non-availment of credit, so abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST could not be denied on that basis. A further demand for credit actually utilized could not be confirmed in addition to a disallowance of the same credit, as that would create a double demand; the matter required fresh scrutiny of the credit records. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251752