https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194381 Cenvat credit could not be utilised to discharge service tax on GTA services availed as a recipient because Rule 3(4)(e) permitted set-off only against tax liability on output services, and the assessee was not providing the relevant output service. The tax demand and consequential interest were therefore sustained. On penalty, the authority noted that the default was said to arise from a misinterpretation of law and that proceedings under Section 76 are quasi-criminal, requiring examination of the statutory ingredients and a fair opportunity of hearing. The penalty issue was remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration. en-us Mon, 30 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Sep 2017 15:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194381 Cenvat credit could not be utilised to discharge service tax on GTA services availed as a recipient because Rule 3(4)(e) permitted set-off only against tax liability on output services, and the assessee was not providing the relevant output service. The tax demand and consequential interest were therefore sustained. On penalty, the authority noted that the default was said to arise from a misinterpretation of law and that proceedings under Section 76 are quasi-criminal, requiring examination of the statutory ingredients and a fair opportunity of hearing. The penalty issue was remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 30 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194381