https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336137 The appeal in this case concerning the denial of cenvat credit on various services utilized by the appellant's units from April 2012 to March 2013 resulted in a remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a comprehensive reconsideration. The court highlighted that the disputed services, primarily used by the corporate office, should be allocated credit as per Rule 7(c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The judgment recognized the discrepancy in the disputed period and directed a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case, ultimately allowing the appeal for further review and decision-making by the Commissioner (Appeals). en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:14:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336137 The appeal in this case concerning the denial of cenvat credit on various services utilized by the appellant's units from April 2012 to March 2013 resulted in a remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a comprehensive reconsideration. The court highlighted that the disputed services, primarily used by the corporate office, should be allocated credit as per Rule 7(c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The judgment recognized the discrepancy in the disputed period and directed a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case, ultimately allowing the appeal for further review and decision-making by the Commissioner (Appeals). Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336137