https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259299 Reversal of CENVAT credit on common input services, together with interest, was treated as equivalent to non-availment of credit, so the objection to claiming Notification No. 1/2006-ST did not survive. The distinction drawn between inputs and input services was rejected, and reversal of the attributable credit cured the defect for purposes of the notification benefit. The assessee was therefore entitled to the exemption, and denial of the benefit was not sustainable. en-us Mon, 09 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 May 2015 11:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259299 Reversal of CENVAT credit on common input services, together with interest, was treated as equivalent to non-availment of credit, so the objection to claiming Notification No. 1/2006-ST did not survive. The distinction drawn between inputs and input services was rejected, and reversal of the attributable credit cured the defect for purposes of the notification benefit. The assessee was therefore entitled to the exemption, and denial of the benefit was not sustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259299