https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259088 The writ petition challenging Ext.P6 order confirming service tax and penalty was dismissed. The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing and trading, mistakenly availed ineligible credit. The court held that the petitioner, whose legal proceedings began before the 2014 amendment to the Finance Act, is not required to deposit 7.5% of the confirmed tax amount to appeal before the Tribunal. The petitioner is directed to pursue the alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the Tribunal under the pre-2014 provisions of the Finance Act, with an application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the amounts confirmed in Ext.P6 order. en-us Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259088 The writ petition challenging Ext.P6 order confirming service tax and penalty was dismissed. The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing and trading, mistakenly availed ineligible credit. The court held that the petitioner, whose legal proceedings began before the 2014 amendment to the Finance Act, is not required to deposit 7.5% of the confirmed tax amount to appeal before the Tribunal. The petitioner is directed to pursue the alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the Tribunal under the pre-2014 provisions of the Finance Act, with an application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the amounts confirmed in Ext.P6 order. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259088