https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345611 The appellant's claim for CENVAT credit on structural steel used for unipole fabrication was denied. The Tribunal ruled against the appellant, stating that the steel was not eligible for credit as it was used for displaying advertisements on unipoles. The invocation of the extended period for denial of credit was deemed questionable. The order was upheld within the one-year limitation period, with interest, but demands beyond that period were set aside. No penalty was imposed due to the previous Tribunal decision on the issue. The penalty was therefore set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. en-us Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Aug 2017 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345611 The appellant's claim for CENVAT credit on structural steel used for unipole fabrication was denied. The Tribunal ruled against the appellant, stating that the steel was not eligible for credit as it was used for displaying advertisements on unipoles. The invocation of the extended period for denial of credit was deemed questionable. The order was upheld within the one-year limitation period, with interest, but demands beyond that period were set aside. No penalty was imposed due to the previous Tribunal decision on the issue. The penalty was therefore set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345611