https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187141 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that Rule 6 (3) (c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 does not explicitly require monthly payment of 20% from the cenvat account. The appellant's ability to adjust excess credit from certain months against future payments exceeding the 20% limit was supported by the Tribunal, citing flexibility in compliance within a financial year. The impugned order was set aside, highlighting the importance of overall annual compliance rather than strict monthly calculations and payments. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:47:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187141 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that Rule 6 (3) (c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 does not explicitly require monthly payment of 20% from the cenvat account. The appellant's ability to adjust excess credit from certain months against future payments exceeding the 20% limit was supported by the Tribunal, citing flexibility in compliance within a financial year. The impugned order was set aside, highlighting the importance of overall annual compliance rather than strict monthly calculations and payments. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187141