https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174946 The appellant was found ineligible for CENVAT credit not proportionate to them, resulting in the denial of credit, along with interest and penalty imposition. The issue arose from procedural errors in credit transfer, as the appellant failed to follow the correct procedure by not obtaining invoices in the name of individual firms proportionate to the services rendered. Despite this, the appellant was granted a waiver for pre-deposit and a stay against recovery during the appeal process, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance in CENVAT credit transfer. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174946 The appellant was found ineligible for CENVAT credit not proportionate to them, resulting in the denial of credit, along with interest and penalty imposition. The issue arose from procedural errors in credit transfer, as the appellant failed to follow the correct procedure by not obtaining invoices in the name of individual firms proportionate to the services rendered. Despite this, the appellant was granted a waiver for pre-deposit and a stay against recovery during the appeal process, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance in CENVAT credit transfer. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174946