https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254249 The Tribunal found the appellant wrongly availed CENVAT credit, leading to a demand of Rs. 3,28,51,708/- with interest and penalty. The appellant failed to rectify missing invoice details, necessitating a deposit of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- for further adjudication. A demand of Rs. 1,88,61,621/- arose from invoices not in the appellant's name, proposed for remand. CENVAT credit of Rs. 21,27,676/- was denied due to lack of invoices, subject to verification upon remand. An amount of Rs. 1,72,710/- was demanded from an unregistered service provider, pending verification of registration application. The matter was remanded for thorough examination and document verification, with a deposit requirement for compliance. en-us Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254249 The Tribunal found the appellant wrongly availed CENVAT credit, leading to a demand of Rs. 3,28,51,708/- with interest and penalty. The appellant failed to rectify missing invoice details, necessitating a deposit of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- for further adjudication. A demand of Rs. 1,88,61,621/- arose from invoices not in the appellant's name, proposed for remand. CENVAT credit of Rs. 21,27,676/- was denied due to lack of invoices, subject to verification upon remand. An amount of Rs. 1,72,710/- was demanded from an unregistered service provider, pending verification of registration application. The matter was remanded for thorough examination and document verification, with a deposit requirement for compliance. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254249